Variant Multiclassing and class-level gated feats

[TristanTheViking]

I had a discussion earlier with someone who believes that variant multiclassing as a class allows you to take feats that require levels in that class, eg a Cleric with Fighter VMC could take the feat Advanced Weapon Training (which requires 5 levels of Fighter) once they've gotten the Weapon Training class feature from the VMC.
Their argument was that because Weapon Training requires 5 levels of Fighter (because that's when Fighters get it normally), having the class feature in addition to technically "multiclassing" as a Fighter (via VMC), you're considered to have at least 5 levels of Fighter which allows you to take the feat.

I disagree with their interpretation. My reading is that despite "multiclassing" as a Fighter, you don't actually have any levels on the Fighter class, so you don't qualify for the feat. All VMC gives you is the class feature and an effective level for the purposes of using it. Because you don't lose any levels with VMC, you don't gain any either. Every VMC-granted class feature that scales with level gives you an effective level for the purposes of that feature (eg Bardic Knowledge as a Bard of your character level, Oracle Curse as an Oracle of half your character level), which wouldn't be necessary if you already counted as a full-level member of that class.

So tell me, Paizo forums, which of us is correct? The other party is adamant that I'm wrong, to the point that they refuse to continue the discussion with me.

[RandomReverie]

I agree with you.

As far as I can tell, VMC never once says it qualifies the character to count as an X lvl of that class. VMC only gives you certain class features. VMC isn't standard multi-classing and it already allows you to access class features from a second class without missing out on your own class's progression, I don't think it should provide THAT much more benefit.

[Chess Pwn]

They don't have any fighter levels and can't qualify.

[CalethosVB]

The VMC chapter in PFU doesn't say that you count as a member of the VMC class, so you don't count as a member of that class. But as long as you and your GM agree on the rules you want to rub with, I don't see why you couldn't do what you're proposing.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

A lot of VMC abilities reference character level as being the effective class level in relation to the VMC; the Barbarian Rage Powers feature, the Bard's Bardic Knowledge, the Cleric's Domain feature, the list goes on. There are also a lot of abilities that reference a reduced effective class level, usually by a flat amount (though some by a percentage, probably half) in comparison to your total character level.

If the assumption is that you have a class level in relation to your VMC choice, then not only do any abilities that reference of "equal to your character level" become redundant statements, but it also creates a major inconsistency within the rules, where you're a level 7 Bard, but only have Inspire Courage as a level 3 Bard, even though your class level in Bard is 7.

It's quite clear that the benefits and restrictions for each of these function at a given level, independant from what level the class would normally obtain them, meaning the idea that you actually have levels in a VMC class (which would actually override the level limitations cited out in each class ability) is ridiculous.

There's also this clause here:

Variant Multiclassing wrote:

...a character can't take levels in the secondary class she gains from this variant.

Which practically says "Oh yeah, you can't have character levels in your chosen VMC class." Although it's in relation to standard multiclassing and VMC used in conjunction, it's still quite clear that you are never intended to have levels with a VMC class.

But, for your GM's example, if he used a Warpriest with one of his special Bonus Feats (where his Warpriest levels count as Fighter levels for fulfilling pre-requisites), and had the Fighter VMC, then yes, he very well could pick up an Advanced Weapon Training feat (though I have no idea why he would, they aren't great unless you have the Weapon Training ranks/bonuses to back it up). But it has to be a Warpriest Bonus Feat, and not a regular feat.

Or, he could be a Brawler of 5th level or higher, with a VMC in Fighter, and he could pick the Advanced Weapon Training feat.

The same rules apply for Advanced Armor Training as well.

[LegionPothIX]

Let's directly compare VMC's definitions with that of standard multiclassing, since that's what you're implying should be done.

"Instead of gaining the abilities granted by the next level in your character's current class, he can instead gain the 1st-level abilities of a new class, adding all of those abilities to his existing ones. This is known as “multiclassing."

That's how standard multiclassing is defined. It doesn't state in this definition that you gain class levels. Only that you gain the abilities of the first level of that class.

It goes on to be clarified in an example given for multi-classing, that you add the two classes together for the purpose of calculating their statistics.

Now, let's see what variant multiclassing has to say:

"This optional system allows a character to trade out half her feats in order to gain the benefits of a secondary class."

Note, the benefits of a secondary class are defined in the standard multi-classing description, that are later augmented here.

"These rules enable characters to gain many of the benefits of multiclassing without sacrificing advancement in their primary classes, [...] Under the standard rules, multiclassing can lead to a wide disparity in character ability. With this system, each character can choose a secondary class at 1st level that she trains in throughout her career, without giving up levels in her primary class. "

This tells us that we calculate the effective class level, and derived statistics differently, but we still are multiclassed into that secondary class. Moreover, that our class level for our primary class is not adjusted, and that we are explicitly progressing in the secondary class as well.

"It is probably a good idea to use either this variant system or normal multiclassing, but it's possible for the two systems to be used together."

This tells us that the two multi-class options are regarded with the same weight and depth. Unfortunately we don't have a Paizo printed example of this variant multiclass option that we do for primary multiclass.

And, if we excluded that example of primary multi-classing, there would be literally no reason to believe that a primary multi-classed character counts as the number of levels invested in the class. Since the definition only states you gain the abilities.

With that being the case, there's no reason to believe you don't count as the class of your level for the powers your granted unless explicitly stated otherwise.

[master_marshmallow]

I think it's purposely not defined for DM's and players to decide what works best for them.

Not much help as far as rules go, but most of the unchained stuff is sorta stuck in an "as is" state like most of the other alternate rules systems.

[voska66]

master_marshmallow wrote:

I think it's purposely not defined for DM's and players to decide what works best for them.

Not much help as far as rules go, but most of the unchained stuff is sorta stuck in an "as is" state like most of the other alternate rules systems.

I see these optional rules as suggested house rules. So it's not like they are official core rules.

I see variant multiclass and counting fully as class of that level as the text suggest but doesn't out right say.

"With this system, each character can choose a secondary class at 1st level that she trains in throughout her career, without giving up levels in her primary class."

So secondary class is level is that class in my book.

[Del_Taco_Eater]

This made me think of the evangelist. If your alligned class has something based on level like a warpriests effetive BAB when qualifying for feats, that wouldn't continue as an evangelist, would it?

[Calth]

I usually consider VMCing to let you qualify as the class, but not have any levels in it. If there was a requirement of having X class, VMC meets it since you do gain the class (even though its called a secondary class) but you never gain any levels in that class. I don't know much of anything that would benefit from it that way, but its how I would rule it. Basically, its similar to how wands work for 4th level casters before level 4.

[SodiumTelluride]

Calth wrote:

I usually consider VMCing to let you qualify as the class, but not have any levels in it. If there was a requirement of having X class, VMC meets it since you do gain the class (even though its called a secondary class) but you never gain any levels in that class. I don't know much of anything that would benefit from it that way, but its how I would rule it. Basically, its similar to how wands work for 4th level casters before level 4.

Interesting interpretation. I think all the feats that care about class will say "<class> level X" even if X is 1. But lots of magic items specify that they only work for oracles, or barbarians, or whatever. So in that situation, it makes sense to count VMC as having the class.

[master_marshmallow]

SodiumTelluride wrote:

Calth wrote:

I usually consider VMCing to let you qualify as the class, but not have any levels in it. If there was a requirement of having X class, VMC meets it since you do gain the class (even though its called a secondary class) but you never gain any levels in that class. I don't know much of anything that would benefit from it that way, but its how I would rule it. Basically, its similar to how wands work for 4th level casters before level 4.

Interesting interpretation. I think all the feats that care about class will say "<class> level X" even if X is 1. But lots of magic items specify that they only work for oracles, or barbarians, or whatever. So in that situation, it makes sense to count VMC as having the class.

Or it does make sense.

Generally, I'll rule that you count as having levels in a class specifically for that class feature e.g. a VMC fighter could qualify for feats based on Bravery, Advanced Armor Training, and/or Advanced Weapon Training, but not for normal fighter only feats like Weapon Specialization.

I rule items to function the same way, such as an archetype treating you as fighter level x if said archetype or VMC gives you that class feature (see the thread on the Sash of the War Champion).

Since there is verbiage in other archetypes that says something like "with this don't qualify for x feats" I'm lead to believe that you would qualify.

That's my house rule though, and none of that is actually substantiated by anything official.