I don't see why you wouldn't be.
The very concept of "Mulitclassing" would indicate you count as having more than one class.
Also, every entry starts "A character who chooses XXXXX as her secondary class," would indicate you are a member of the class.
Now, you still might run into feats that don't work, since you don't get all class features of the secondary class, and the feat can't affect a class feature you don't have.
And some of the VMC classes specify you don't qualify for certain feats (VMC Witches do not qualify for Extra Hex, for example).
Any situations in particular you are wondering about?
can a Fighter / VMC Wizard use wands and scrolls?
I would say, a Fighter VMC Wizard is a Wizard for things that require Wizard. He specifically has a secondary class called Wizard.
But, VMC Wizard doesn't grant the Spells class feature, so he does not have a spell list. Since he has no spell list, he can't use wands or scrolls (without UMD).
The Robes of Arcane Heritage should work fine. You are a Sorcerer, have a bloodline, and get bloodline powers at certain levels. You would be considered 4 levels higher, so could get the 9th level bloodline power at 11th level (normally gained at 15th level of VMC Sorcerer).
The Monk's Robes is a little trickier. You are a Monk, so your unarmed strike would be the same as a monk 3 levels higher (normally level -2). For the AC bonus, you don't get any bonus until 15th level, then you get a flat +3. So you wouldn't get any bonus level 1-9, at level 10 you would get a +3, but that's it. The VMC Monk doesn't get a scaling bonus or Wis to AC, so being "5 levels higher" doesn't grant them.
I rule that a Variant Multiclass allows your character to count as a Level 0 of that class. You can use granted abilitys as prerequisites (such as Channel Energy to get Channel Smite), use items that call for that specific class (such as Vambraces of the Tactician), but you never count as a particular level of that class (and thus could never take Weapon Specalisation, as Fighters must be level 4 to take such an ability)
I don't have the book, but I've read the parts that have gotten put up on d20pfsrd.com, and the many discussions of it in these forums. So, take this as you will.
As I understand it, Variant multiclassing never actually gives you levels in that class, so you can't take feats that require levels in that class, and you can't use spell trigger items unless the particular VMC features give you spells (as far as I know, not having read the book, none do). If VMC gives you a particular class feature, you can take feats and use items that require those features.
Now, this is how the rules are in the book, since this is a rules forum. So phrases like "I rule that" aren't appropriate unless there's actually ambiguity in the written rules. To my knowledge, there isn't. Of course, the whole point of Unchained is to mix things up and do what you want with house-rules. However, that's not a subject for the rules forum, but more the general discussion or suggestions/houserules/homebrew forums.
You haven't read the book but can speak to their being no ambiguity in the rules?
The book does not specify to any capacity whether or not VMC levels count as class levels.
Also, the majority of the Unchained Book is basically houserules. VMC is not available in PFS.
You haven't read the book but can speak to their being no ambiguity in the rules?
The book does not specify to any capacity whether or not VMC levels count as class levels.
Also, the majority of the Unchained Book is basically houserules. VMC is not available in PFS.
To be honest, there isn't any ambiguity in the rules. Most questions about the system have been "Do you get this thing that isn't mentioned in the book?"
With the answer always "No, you get what the book tells you."
I seriously don't understand how there are so many questions about it, since it's really really really simple.
the question are leading from the flavor side and the fact that as the VMC is written conflicts with the flavor and concept of being a multiclass. For the most part they are an amplified archetypes than a multiclass system.
Not really. I mean multiclassing is just have elements of two classes. Archetypes are more swapping features for more specific features of a specific flavour. It's more multiclassing than it is archetyping.
I mean, if you want to play a Fighter with some druid added in you can use this get a few druidic necessities like the druidic language, wild empathy, and a companion.
How does that conflict with the flavour of multiclassing?
There's no such thing as a VMC "level" in the book.
True, but some VMC grant abilities that have a level (ex. VMC monk grants unarmed strike with an effective monk level).
So..
Do you count as a member of the VMC class?
Yes, it says you have chosen the class, so you should count as being that class same as choosing any character class.
Do you have levels in the class?
No, you don't have, say, 4 levels of Fighter, even if you are character level 4 with VMC Fighter. But....
Do you have levels in the class?
Yes, some abilities have have an effective level that can be affected by effects that modify level. Ex. VMC Monk Unarmed Strike has an effective Monk level that could be increased by a Monk's Belt.
But not all abilities have a level. The VMC Monk AC bonus is a static number with no scaling. These wouldn't be affected by effects that modify level.
And lastly, you only have the class features listed. So a VMC Wizard can't use wands, as they don't have the Spells class feature and so they have no spell list.
a secondary Cavalier is still a Cavalier; just a Cavalier without any class levels.
For any rules baised decision I use four criteria;
1. Is it written?
2. Does it seem intended?
3. Can it be abused unfairly?
4. Does allowing the rule increase/decrease the groups fun as a whole?
So lets go through allowing Vambraces of the Tactician with this method;
1. Not clear. doesn't specify one way or another whether a VMC PC counts as that class.
2. Multiclassing means multiple classes, implying that a PC with Variant Multiclassing belongs to two classes.
3. Lets assume the VMCing character is concidered a level 0 Cavalier, unless otherwise stated. How could such a decision be OP? I haven't come up with anything yet.
4. Allowing Feat sharing between more players? yeah, thats fun.
Again since Unchained is basically the big book of house rules, GMs adding a little extra thought is not a bad thing. there are also holes in these rules that Paizo hasn't accounted for.
For example, How would you rule a Cleric VMCing into Order of the Star Cavlier would calculate their Channel energy damage?
It says you choose a secondary class. And then proceeds to define "secondary class" in a way that is strictly different from an actual class. Kind of obviates your first point-- at best it'd debatable and open to interpretation.
I disagree. There is no definition of being a class other than having the class. You have the class, because you specifically have chosen to have it. Not having a specific number of levels of the class doesn't mean you didn't chose it/have it.
As for the third one... your question and your answer are not the same thing. "Do you have levels in the class" is a clear "No", as you yourself have pointed out.
"Are you treated as having levels in the class for some secondary class features, when-- and only when-- they specifically say that you do?"
That's a yes. But you still don't have any levels of Monk.
The similar wording on 2 and 3 was intentional. You have a class level for abilities that say you do, and that level can be modified by things that affect level for those abilities.
At no time do the Variant Multiclassing Rules alter your class in any way. What they do is give you certain class ABILITIES in trade for 5 feats over the course of your characters career.
So you are never considered to have any other class than your primary.
Hence my rule of counting as a level 0 PC of that class.
a VMC Fighter counts as a Fighter, but A VMC Fighter has no levels in Fighter.
So a VMC fighter can use effects that require the charcter to be a Fighter, but will never qualify for effects that requre them to be a certan level of Fighter.
Exactly my point. There is no definition of being the class other than having the class-- and you don't have the class. You have the secondary class.
You have the class as your secondary class. No different that saying you have a class as your primary class. You still have both classes.
To use an example, the VMC Druid knows Druidic. Since only Druids know Druidic, VMC Druid must count as being a Druid in order to know the language.
I figured it was intentional. My point was to make it abundantly clear that presenting it that way was not even remotely what your argument actually supported.
I disagree. Rhetoric plays a part in presenting your argument. The way I presented it fully supports what I said, even if you dislike how it was presented or disagree with my position.
You specifically choose a class for your character to have. You count as having the class.
You have no class levels in the class, but many abilities do have a class level.
So requirements of class levels (Fighter 4) don't work, but things that increase level for an ability you possess (Monk unarmed strike damage) will.
So to extend on this, Can a VMC Paladin wield a Holy Avenger? I mean they follow the Paladins code...
So to extend on this, Can a VMC Paladin wield a Holy Avenger? I mean they follow the Paladins code...
I would say yes, you are a Paladin so it becomes +5 Holy, but it would only grant SR 5 and no Dispel because you have no class levels.
So to extend on this, Can a VMC Paladin wield a Holy Avenger? I mean they follow the Paladins code...I would say yes, you are a Paladin so it becomes +5 Holy, but it would only grant SR 5 and no Dispel because you have no class levels.
Sounds fair, though I would allow Dispel Magic at level 0 strength.
By the time you get a Holy Avenger you'd need to be facing a damn weak spell. I like the idea of the PC having the option, even if it is an inaffective one.