Inquisitor Help: Too many options, not enough obvious winners


Homebrew and House Rules

101 to 150 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

ChaosTicket wrote:

I'm not going to get what I want because of the limited game system. The game system would require reforms to be less rigid. Desires become wishes when something prevents you from fulfilling them and Pathfinder hinders Pathfinder.

You would need additional feats and less pointless requirement feats to get all the feats necessary to master at least one complicated fighting style in addition to other defense and miscellaneous feats.

Spells. I don't know why the resurrection spells aren't in the Inquisitors list.

SKills for the Inquisitor are great. The Charisma ones are lacking because Charisma is the only stat that doesn't effect anything but skills, not including charisma based casters.

Guys, He finally might be understanding that his expectations of what a character can do is not in line with what the game/GM's allow.


More like its painfully reinforced how often the game system is broken. It would require a list of houserules to fix things.

Here are some quick ones Ive thought of. Some are very powerful, some are fair.

#1 one feat per level for every character
#2 One increase to a stat of your choice every 2 levels
#3 The new minimum of skill points a class starts out with is 4.
#4 Weapon and Armor proficiencies become 2 new categories of skills
#5 characters with access to either the arcane and/or divine spell lists are not restricted by class unique lists
#6 spell durations and effects are calculated by character level, not caster level.

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I can get behind the 4 skillpoint minimum, but the rest of your ideas are terrible.

1. And either the feats are weakened or the fighter cries as it's killed off completely just as the weapon master's handbook gave it some hope.

2. Will have minimal effect. CRs might have to be adjusted since it's technically better than +5 point-buy

4. Classes are given the weapons they are given as part of balance (I'm aware this is a concept you don't understand).

5. Classes are given the spells they are given as part of balance (I'm aware this is a concept you don't understand).

6. If you want progressing your martial ability to progress your casting ability, play a class that does both, pathfinder was intended to reduce multiclassing.

My advice for you is to find a point-based system and play it, you're not getting what you want from a class-based system.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Pathfinder isn't broken in the way you're talking about. The game system just isn't what you want. Find a different game system that is more accurate to the kind of game you want. Or you change your view of what this game is. This game isn't the opportunity to play SuperBatman. It's the opportunity to play something like the X-Men, a group of people that are above average because of special abilities.


Chess Pwn wrote:
Pathfinder isn't broken in the way you're talking about. The game system just isn't what you want. Find a different game system that is more accurate to the kind of game you want. Or you change your view of what this game is. This game isn't the opportunity to play SuperBatman. It's the opportunity to play something like the X-Men, a group of people that are above average because of special abilities.

Yeah like the guy who can regenerate from anything. Or how about the one that can move around asteroids?

That just makes me pine for Mutants and Masterminds or Champions. RIP City of Heroes.

I would like to see less restrictions. Sure get a character to level 21+ and have tier 9 spells.

Theres too much padding and not enough expansions. There isnt enough to do outside the box.


Do you want a guy who can regenerate from anything or move around asteroids? Sounds like a Cleric to me... [Heal spells and Wind Walk]

What about Cloistered Cleric for skill points, with a fighter dip to get all the goodies you want?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

A 40 point buy Tristalt game might be just up your alley!


MageHunter wrote:

Do you want a guy who can regenerate from anything or move around asteroids? Sounds like a Cleric to me... [Heal spells and Wind Walk]

What about Cloistered Cleric for skill points, with a fighter dip to get all the goodies you want?

If you don't want to multiclass i think Crusader archetype stacks.


Can anyone recommend an Archetype for an Inquisitor of the Dwarven Goddess of Trade, Commerce, and Negotiation (custom setting); specifically a character who is sent to troubleshoot impediments to establishing trade relationships, root out monsters and bandits that stand in the way or otherwise undermine mutually beneficial exchanges, and to acquire information that would provide useful leverage in negotiations.

An Inquisitor with the Conversion Inquisition (slightly reskinned) is probably ideal for this since it lets you be a Dwarven social character, and a Cleric of the goddess is probably less of a troubleshooter and more of an "official representative." But none of the archetypes seem to fit this concept (all of the archetypes seem somewhat extreme, whereas the Goddess of Negotiation is necessarily flexible), so should I just go with the vanilla inquisitor? Deity's favored weapon is the longhammer.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChaosTicket wrote:

More like its painfully reinforced how often the game system is broken. It would require a list of houserules to fix things.

Here are some quick ones Ive thought of. Some are very powerful, some are fair.

#1 one feat per level for every character
#2 One increase to a stat of your choice every 2 levels
#3 The new minimum of skill points a class starts out with is 4.
#4 Weapon and Armor proficiencies become 2 new categories of skills
#5 characters with access to either the arcane and/or divine spell lists are not restricted by class unique lists
#6 spell durations and effects are calculated by character level, not caster level.

One of the things to keep in mind, this a group story telling game. There is nothing wrong with wanting to have a well built character. However, it is essentially a team game, not an MMO or Skyrim. Your build should not be cover all bases. You don't have all th actions in a combat, nor the solutions to every puzzle. If you have all the answers and can meet any challenge, then there is no point to having a team or playing the game. Write some fantasy mary sue fiction and have a good time.

Though, if you want to play with the team. In football terms the Inquisitor is like a tight end. You have options for defense, offense, and support. You fight better than full casters, you cast better than bloodragers, rangers, and paladins. You can recover or outlast against just about anything.

If you're worried about spotlight moments then play the game. Your fellow players will remember you're actions most when you help them. Protect the wizard from the BBEG's mook, get the healer back on his feat, flank and destroy with the rogue, go back to back with the tank and hold the line, remind the paladin that Justice isn't always nice, track and scout with the ranger, and when you see that monster all you need to say is,"die monster, you don't belong in this world".

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I guess we're all playing sub optimal characters and all of our campaigns end in failure. Damn you Paizo!


Oncoming_Storm wrote:
I guess we're all playing sub optimal characters and all of our campaigns end in failure. Damn you Paizo!

Right! Because the term munchkin was invented by fools who value story and fun!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gravefiller613 wrote:
ChaosTicket wrote:

More like its painfully reinforced how often the game system is broken. It would require a list of houserules to fix things.

Here are some quick ones Ive thought of. Some are very powerful, some are fair.

#1 one feat per level for every character
#2 One increase to a stat of your choice every 2 levels
#3 The new minimum of skill points a class starts out with is 4.
#4 Weapon and Armor proficiencies become 2 new categories of skills
#5 characters with access to either the arcane and/or divine spell lists are not restricted by class unique lists
#6 spell durations and effects are calculated by character level, not caster level.

One of the things to keep in mind, this a group story telling game. There is nothing wrong with wanting to have a well built character. However, it is essentially a team game, not an MMO or Skyrim. Your build should not be cover all bases. You don't have all th actions in a combat, nor the solutions to every puzzle. If you have all the answers and can meet any challenge, then there is no point to having a team or playing the game. Write some fantasy mary sue fiction and have a good time.

Though, if you want to play with the team. In football terms the Inquisitor is like a tight end. You have options for defense, offense, and support. You fight better than full casters, you cast better than bloodragers, rangers, and paladins. You can recover or outlast against just about anything.

If you're worried about spotlight moments then play the game. Your fellow players will remember you're actions most when you help them. Protect the wizard from the BBEG's mook, get the healer back on his feat, flank and destroy with the rogue, go back to back with the tank and hold the line, remind the paladin that Justice isn't always nice, track and scout with the ranger, and when you see that monster all you need to say is,"die monster, you don't belong in this world".

It's like the difference between being Superman, or being the Suicide Squad. Pathfinder is more Suicide Squad than Superman. Superman is an incredibly powerful individual who can do everything very well - he's smart, charismatic, physically beastly, mentally tough, incredibly fast, and has a giant toolkit of at-will powers for all situations (flight, seeing through walls, laser eyebeams, freeze breath, coal -> diamond) and a few other tricks (self-resurrection in sunlight, mother named Martha). He could give a 3e Druid a run for their money. The Suicide Squad, on the other hand, is made up of a bunch of quirky, interesting misfits with various specializations. Amanda Waller is smart and mentally tough, Killer Croc is strong and physically a monster, nobody is all that fast, El Diablo has a consistently powerful at-will flame blast, Deadshot is a rather highly optimized martial, Katana and Captain Boomerang are martials with strong, slightly niche builds, Rick Flagg has a Paladin-ish thing going, and Harley Quinn is... uh... charismatic. Frankly speaking, Superman would be as good or better than any Suicide Squad member if he were to take their position (Except Waller), and would probably perform far better than any of them. But that doesn't mean the Suicide Squad is something you don't want - they are a good party in their own right. Pathfinder devs build their classes with a Suicide Squad style party in mind much more than just Superman alone.

Superman v. Suicide Squad:

Superman
-Strong (Really, really strong)
-Fast (Ridiculously so)
-Tough (Basically invincible)
-Smart
-Mentally resilient
-Charismatic (And pleasant to be around)
-Lots of at-will powers
- -Flight
- -Laser Eyebeams
- -Freeze breath
- -X-ray vision
- -Coal to diamond squishing (WBL is no longer a factor)
-Some one-offs
- -Self-resurrection in bright sunlight
- -Mother's name is Martha
- -Only practical method of killing involves shooting or stabbing with a rare alien space mineral
-No weapon dependence
-Sane

Suicide Squad
Deadshot
-Very, very good at shooting guns

Amanda Waller
-Smart
-Mentally resilient
-Intimidating (but not generally charismatic)
-Government funding (WBL breaker)

Killer Croc
-Strong (Can't leave fingerprints in steel, though)
-Tough (Can't take tank-buster shells to the face and walk it off)
-No weapon dependence

El Diablo
-An at-will power
- -Flame blast!
-A powerful one-off
- -Becomes stronger and tougher and flamey-er
-No weapon dependence

Katana
-Cool artifact weapon
-Slightly niche melee build

Captain Boomerang
-Slightly niche throwing build

Rick Flagg
-Good at shooting guns
-Mildly charismatic

Harley Quinn
-Good at shooting guns
-Charismatic


Ever hear of magikarp? In Pokemon there is is a pokemon you could commonly catch from fishing as early as 1994(in Japan). By itself it was useless as it only had a single ability that did no damage. It was difficult to level it up, but when you did you go an impressive Gyrados.

In that game many of the creatures level up and learn new abilities. One aspect is finding ways to get around any linearity in the process to make the creatures stronger or get abilities they would not normally have.

Now put that here I would look into past the restrictions on some classes. Inquisitor actually has the fewest things to work around. #1 have martial weapon proficiencies. #2 additional combat feats. #3 resurrection spells.

Im not asking to make an invincible character. Im asking to make an above average character in several, but not all categories. If I was aking to being tier 9 caster in Arcane/Divine/Druid/Psychic simultaneously while killing Cthulu with my eyes closes then it would be understandable to be opposed as that would be unreasonable.

I also like the Magus but I would like to alter that as well. #1 all armor proficiencies/casting spell in armor at level 1. #2 Cast spells without requiring preparation. #3 reform of spell comnbat & spellstrike system to be applicable to fighting styles other than one-hand.


Regarding the inquisitor, you don't want to invalidate other classes with one new super class, there are ways of addressing some of the issues you've brought up but not all and not from level 1. This is a team game and you shouldn't be trying to play like it's a solo one.

The magus is another class that can do a lot, even most of the things you want it too. Giving a magus plate mail and spells from level 1 though would make it very difficult to challenge, don't you think? Luckily players usually don't specialize in armor the way they do with weapons so it isn't as big a deal to switch from chain shirt to breastplate as you level up. As for spontaneous casting, there is an archetype for that. And there are archetypes for every weapon style I know o, throwing magus, staff magus, two weapon magus, two handed magus, fist punchy magus, playing card magus, you name it.

Going back to the inquisitor, you should have the resources to get proficiency and the basics of any fighting style but you are not a fighter whose claim to fame is taking feats to build out combat styles before one else. An inquisitor is supposed have a basic capacity that they augment with judgements and spells, and when they do that they can compete on the level of the fighter and still have better skills, spells and abilities beyond that. Look at what your group can do, not just you.then figure out I'd you really have any gaps.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChaosTicket wrote:

More like its painfully reinforced how often the game system is broken. It would require a list of houserules to fix things.

Here are some quick ones Ive thought of. Some are very powerful, some are fair.

#1 one feat per level for every character
#2 One increase to a stat of your choice every 2 levels
#3 The new minimum of skill points a class starts out with is 4.
#4 Weapon and Armor proficiencies become 2 new categories of skills
#5 characters with access to either the arcane and/or divine spell lists are not restricted by class unique lists
#6 spell durations and effects are calculated by character level, not caster level.

If you want a powerful character out of char-gen play shadowrun. Shadowrun is great for playing fairly tough characters.

also, Great troll thread. After reading your replies, I can only come to the conclusion that this thread is purely based on trolling. well done.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It how all his threads are. Complain that awesome class is too weak or that he can't solo pathfinder with a class. Get lots of advice or examples of why his complaints aren't really that well supported. He ignores it all and continues to complain that PF doesn't allow him to make a super character. Eventually the thread dies down and he waits a bit before starting again.

Cause seriously, this guy want's a magus that can spellcombat while two handing his weapon in full plate from lv1. And he doesn't grasp how that's FAR to powerful for pathfinder.


hell, you can't even cast a spell in skyrim if you are using a 2handed weapon, and that game is all about making an overpowered character.

a bit of golden adivce- Don't feed the troll.


Trolling or not, why the hell haven't you made a Warpriest archer already? You get combat feats, bonus feats, scaling damage, self-buffs out the wazoo, your deity's weapon AND martial weapon proficiencies, the ability to use your Warpriest level as your Fighter level for feats, and Wisdom spellcasting and some good, good saves.

With an archetype, you can even get Weapon Training to make use of those sick Advanced Weapon Training options that the Fighter recently got.

Otherwise. Seriously OP, you have to be trolling because who actually bases any baseline on having an advanced firearm? You do not get advanced firearms in many campaigns. I think Golarion specific, the only confirmed advanced firearm in any availability are revolvers. What game are you playing? Who is your DM?


Its not a troll thread...intentionally. Each thread ends up a criticism of the game eventually once the limitations of it prevent growth.

So its starts like "I have a problem, my character has flaws in the things its supposed to be good at. How do I fix these flaws?" Then people come in and say "youre not supposed to be 100% in the things you do and certainly not be even able to try everything." Under the rational of something like if everyone is good at fighting there wouldnt need to be a Fighter class of the other dozens of classes and over a hundred archetypes.

After that it go arguing between people and myself with people. I understand the points between not having and uber character than can solo Cthulu without any problem. It however keeps going back others opinions which do not remain consistent because multiple people are saying them.

I think "How do I make this better?" Ingame there are alternatives to a problem with a simple answer. For example I would like to have Point Blank Master on ever character I have a ranged fighting style build. I cant have that? Well I find that to unreasonable limitation. Now what will follow is the cycle again between people arguing what is reasonable and what is unreasonable.

Here's another simple problem. How do I get Breath of Life and Raise Dead for an Inquisitor? I expect someone will exaggerate and say that makes the Cleric useless.

Actually I think its the resistance change that confounds me the most. This whole things basically goes "I want to do something. I suggest that everyone including myself be able to do so." And cue all this.

Edit: There are points in not having things like a Magus flying with a greatwsword and Composite Longbow in full plate armor with Armor training...at level 1. But I dont think there should be any hard caps to prevent people from having a mix of proficiencies, feats, skills and spells. Its class railroading.


ChaosTicket wrote:

Ever hear of magikarp? In Pokemon there is is a pokemon you could commonly catch from fishing as early as 1994(in Japan). By itself it was useless as it only had a single ability that did no damage. It was difficult to level it up, but when you did you go an impressive Gyrados.

...
I also like the Magus but I would like to alter that as well. #1 all armor proficiencies/casting spell in armor at level 1. #2 Cast spells without requiring preparation. #3 reform of spell comnbat & spellstrike system to be applicable to fighting styles other than one-hand.

So you want a Magikarp->Gyarados transformation... based on what class you pick? Because those changes are super front-loaded, and if you do that then the class doesn't start as Magikarp. It starts as Gyarados. The Magikarp->Gyarados thing already happens. It's a Gunslinger hitting level 5 and getting Dex to damage. It's a Barbarian hitting level 10 and getting pounce. It's a Wizard hitting level 13 and saying "I'm making my own planet! With blackjack. And hookers." Pathfinder is actually pretty great at sudden spikes in power with no real warning beforehand.

Also, archetypes exist for basically this purpose. Here's a spontaneous magus. This one gets the armor stuff faster. This one does spell combat differently. And those are Paizo, I'm sure I could find more if I dug into third party stuff. I don't think they all stack with each other, but acting like these weren't already options is just wrong.

Breath of Life and Raise Dead for Inquisitor?

Mystic Past Life (Su) wrote:
You can add spells from another spellcasting class to the spell list of your current spellcasting class. You add a number of spells equal to 1 + your spellcasting class's key ability score bonus (Wisdom for clerics, and so on). The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you're adding them to. For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell. These spells do not have to be spells you can cast as a 1st-level character. The number of spells granted by this ability is set at 1st level. Changes to your ability score do not change the number of spells gained. This racial trait replaces shards of the past.

You'll need a specific race, but it's fairly easy.

...class railroading? Classes are designed as very specific packages. Of course they make some specific choices for you. They're designed that way. Even if a class let you pick all your features you're still locked in on BAB, skills, HD, and saves. If you want something other than a class-based system, you should be playing a very different game. As others have suggested, something with a point buy. Mutants and Masterminds is great for this. A good analogy here is a restaurant. A restaurant is generally willing to do some substitutions (archetypes). If you ask them to replace your ground beef with foie gras, your slice of American cheese with a whole grated white truffle, your fried egg with several quail's eggs, all for the same price... it ain't happening.


Please dont focus on one thing Ive written to the point of fault and/or exaggeration. Pokemon is basically an RPG game where you develop characters. The point was that you keep developing characters and look for alternative ways to get something you want or need.

In that way then yes adding some additional weapon proficiencies, feats, and spells to any character would be useful to break out of the narrow class range.

I do not like the lack of freedom, or more accurately the severe handicaps of trying to improve beyond the setup.

Multiclassing is a bag of worms.


It's not railroading, it is about balance. It goes with the saying "Jack of all trades, master of none." in that you can spread your effort and time into everything but you wont be great at much of anything. For example, how many people do you know are a doctor and in the evening go work at a garage changing breaks faster than anyone else?

True this is a game and we are making exceptions to the rule but the idea remains the same...you get so many points and feats to reflect your experience and can spread only so far... nothing prevents you from multiclassing but in the end you wont be as good at something as if you stayed one class.

A inquisitor is nice because you come close and if you know what you are doing you can break a barrier or two... That is where the fun is, my archer doesn't have pbm, snap shot..combat reflexes etc...but he doesn't really need it when he is hitting far harder.


Point Blank Master is just one way of avoiding AoOs. I don't know why you're fixated on it. Other ways include moving away (possibly with use of your teamwork feats or spell assistance), casting Litany of Sloth, hiding (or invisibility or similar) or using Air Blessing (available via feat) as mentioned above.

It is very frustrating dealing with someone who will accept only one means of doing something, especially when it's obvious that the means is a bad one. I mean, even for fighters PBM comes in at level >= 6 so in most games you'll have at least a few levels without it. As a sanctified slayer you were looking at level 8 minimum even before noticing the awkward prereq.


Youre talking about more complicated alternatives to the simplest solution. One feat=complete solution to the problem...And youre saying I shouldnt be able to take it for "balance" reasons.

I use some of those partial measures but theyre still not that the best method, just the ones available. Its a cure to the problem. Its not duct tape to fix the hole or crack.

I think your idea of balance is very different from mine. An example of mine is having wheels to keep a stable vehicular platform or having equal strength, speed, and endurance. Yours seems like more like Strength=dumb as having brains and brawn would be bad.

By the way can any Adminstrator move this thread to General Discussions?


You don't probably need PBM. There's the withdraw action which can cover it. 60 ft. That the step up chain can't tackle.


ChaosTicket examples on either extreme are not really relevant. Which is better being a neurosurgeon or knowing the first paragraph of every Wikipedia article. It depends am I in surgery or a trivia night.

This is a role playing game. There is a role for "ok at a lot of things" - classic bard - and there is a role for I hit stuff hard but can you help me spell my name - barbarian. Different builds help create interesting character interactions. But, you don't want to be ok at a lot of things you want 5ish very specific things.

For example, if you want to avoid AOOs mystic past grace is a perfect solution. It would come online way earlier. Finding ways to work with in the limitations is what makes the game fun for many. It also provides you fodder for role play. Why did this ability carry over from your past life and not another power? Why do you have a strong relationship to this life over others?

I should also say it's ok to want those things, but if the system does not allow it you have to either adapt and make the most fun character you can, find a new system, or ask your GM for a house rule. Do you have access to the latter two?


Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:

Trolling or not, why the hell haven't you made a Warpriest archer already? You get combat feats, bonus feats, scaling damage, self-buffs out the wazoo, your deity's weapon AND martial weapon proficiencies, the ability to use your Warpriest level as your Fighter level for feats, and Wisdom spellcasting and some good, good saves.

With an archetype, you can even get Weapon Training to make use of those sick Advanced Weapon Training options that the Fighter recently got.

Otherwise. Seriously OP, you have to be trolling because who actually bases any baseline on having an advanced firearm? You do not get advanced firearms in many campaigns. I think Golarion specific, the only confirmed advanced firearm in any availability are revolvers. What game are you playing? Who is your DM?

He doesn't like warpriest because they don't get enough skill points to be a virtuoso at skills.


ChaosTicket wrote:

Its not a troll thread...intentionally. Each thread ends up a criticism of the game eventually once the limitations of it prevent growth.

So its starts like "I have a problem, my character has flaws in the things its supposed to be good at.

The problem is you seem to think that your characters should be good at EVERYTHING.

The problem isn't the game system, it's your expectations on what a character should be able to do.

The only way you'll be happy in the existing system, if you're not going to reign in your expectations, is to beg your GM to let you play a gestalt character.


Chess Pwn wrote:
Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:
Trolling or not, why the hell haven't you made a Warpriest archer already? You get combat feats, bonus feats, scaling damage, self-buffs out the wazoo, your deity's weapon AND martial weapon proficiencies...
He doesn't like warpriest because they don't get enough skill points to be a virtuoso at skills.

I think Skalds have been recommended many times as well and they get vetoed too. Despite filling every criteria but extra feats. Even when the case was made that rage powers are just as good. Now that the Battle Scion is out maybe that will strike a chord.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
ChaosTicket wrote:

Its not a troll thread...intentionally. Each thread ends up a criticism of the game eventually once the limitations of it prevent growth.

So its starts like "I have a problem, my character has flaws in the things its supposed to be good at.

The problem is you seem to think that your characters should be good at EVERYTHING.

The problem isn't the game system, it's your expectations on what a character should be able to do.

The only way you'll be happy in the existing system, if you're not going to reign in your expectations, is to beg your GM to let you play a gestalt character.

Yes/no I would personally choose to be a well rounded character with 15BAB, 4/6+ skills per level, tier 6 spellcasting and some useful class abilities over a mix-maxed character with top stats in one area and severely lacking in another.

Again was standard are you basing things on? Im using the middle ground between low and high stats.

Seriously why are people so against being able to pick Point Blank Master as a feat? Its not like Im asking for level 20 Maximized Disintegrate 50 times a day.

AT this rate asking to remove Weapon Focus as a feat requirement would cause heads to explode.


No one has a problem with you having that feat. What people are saying is it not mechanically available to a lot of character especially at low levels so you are asking for an exception from your GM or you should try to solve your problem, AOOs, a different way.

You are basically asking "Yo can I ignore this rule?". The answer is yes if your GM says you can, and no if they say you can't but "hey here are some other options". They may be imperfect but they should help you have a fun game. People a graciously offering you their time and providing you with other solutions to the problem. Be it tactics, spells, race traits, etc.

The forum is full of questions like "can I give this feat to my player?" or "can I let a play ignore this prereq?" the answer is normally ya that's a fine exception for a home game.


We're against it because it's not allowed by the rules.


ChaosTicket wrote:

Youre talking about more complicated alternatives to the simplest solution. One feat=complete solution to the problem...And youre saying I shouldnt be able to take it for "balance" reasons.

I use some of those partial measures but theyre still not that the best method, just the ones available. Its a cure to the problem. Its not duct tape to fix the hole or crack.

I think your idea of balance is very different from mine. An example of mine is having wheels to keep a stable vehicular platform or having equal strength, speed, and endurance. Yours seems like more like Strength=dumb as having brains and brawn would be bad.

By the way can any Adminstrator move this thread to General Discussions?

You're assuming a much higher base competence than most of us are. Your vehicular platform that you want is not merely stable, it goes from 0-60 in 2.6 seconds, can 4wd off-road, real leather interior with drinkholders and extra legroom, runs on electricity, and can be topped off at the nearest gas station. Pretty much all classes are good at fighting, insofar as they contribute to combat for your team. But some classes are expected to be good at fighting without feats, while others are given feats to be better. All classes are supposed to contribute a skill or two that they have - but having a full arsenal of skills is reserved for specific classes. Many classes are expected to support the party, without having spells like Breath of Life. I'd argue that Breath of Life is a special class feature, meant to be restricted to Cleric/Oracle/Shaman/Warpriest. Your ideas of unreasonable limitations (every archer should be able to take Point Blank Shot) are not supported by the Pathfinder system. Feat trees are part and parcel of the Pathfinder system, and certain classes (Fighters, Rangers, Warpriests, Monks) are given class features that let them reach further and dive deeper into the feat system to give them an advantage (point-blank shot among them) other classes don't have (although other classes have their own, probably better, advantages).

I don't like the fact that you have to get a half-dozen feats to get most things, but that's the way Pathfinder works. I'd very much like to remove/replace most purely numerical feats and give unskilled classes more skill points and make classes more customizable, but that is outside the rules as they are written. Most of us are not telling you that we are morally opposed to archers getting nifty things faster, but that the Pathfinder system doesn't support archers getting nifty things faster. I'd say that most of us are telling you to adjust your expectations for the system. If you'd like to adjust the system instead, consider moving over to the Suggestions/Houserules/Homebrew section.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
ChaosTicket wrote:


Yes/no I would personally choose to be a well rounded character with 15BAB, 4/6+ skills per level, tier 6 spellcasting and some useful class abilities over a mix-maxed character with top stats in one area and severely lacking in another.

Again was standard are you basing things on? Im using the middle ground between low and high stats.

Seriously why are people so against being able to pick Point Blank Master as a feat? Its not like Im asking for level 20 Maximized Disintegrate 50 times a day.

AT this rate asking to remove Weapon Focus as a feat requirement would cause heads to explode.

I think you may be interpreting minmaxing as the only way to be a munchkin.

Actively attempting to not only remove any major weakness, but any MINOR weakness as well would also fall under being a "munchkin".


ChaosTicket wrote:

Yes/no I would personally choose to be a well rounded character with 15BAB, 4/6+ skills per level, tier 6 spellcasting and some useful class abilities over a mix-maxed character with top stats in one area and severely lacking in another.

Again was standard are you basing things on? Im using the middle ground between low and high stats.

Seriously why are people so against being able to pick Point Blank Master as a feat? Its not like Im asking for level 20 Maximized Disintegrate 50 times a day.

AT this rate asking to remove Weapon Focus as a feat requirement would cause heads to explode.

A min maxed character IS what you're asking for.

What you meant when you said min-maxed is OVER/HYPER SPECIALIZED. A hyper-specialized character is only good at 1 thing and bad at other things.
An optimized character is also a min maxed character, one that gets the most benefits for the lowest cost, and these character often handle and are good at many situations.

An inquisitor, skald, bard, magus, oracle, summoner, cleric archetypes, druid, alchemist, hunter, investigator, shaman, occultist, mesmerist, and spiritualist ALL meet or exceed your qualificaions of, " a well rounded character with 15BAB, 4/6+ skills per level, tier 6 spellcasting and some useful class abilities"

But since you have issues WITH ALL OF THEM, then you're not actually saying what you'd personally choose to be. You have some "secret hidden qualification" that you're not sharing. Which is, ABLE TO DO EVERYTHING. Or at least that is what all your posts would have us believe.


Chess Pwn wrote:
ChaosTicket wrote:

Yes/no I would personally choose to be a well rounded character with 15BAB, 4/6+ skills per level, tier 6 spellcasting and some useful class abilities over a mix-maxed character with top stats in one area and severely lacking in another.

Again was standard are you basing things on? Im using the middle ground between low and high stats.

Seriously why are people so against being able to pick Point Blank Master as a feat? Its not like Im asking for level 20 Maximized Disintegrate 50 times a day.

AT this rate asking to remove Weapon Focus as a feat requirement would cause heads to explode.

A min maxed character IS what you're asking for.

What you meant when you said min-maxed is OVER/HYPER SPECIALIZED. A hyper-specialized character is only good at 1 thing and bad at other things.
An optimized character is also a min maxed character, one that gets the most benefits for the lowest cost, and these character often handle and are good at many situations.

An inquisitor, skald, bard, magus, oracle, summoner, cleric archetypes, druid, alchemist, hunter, investigator, shaman, occultist, mesmerist, and spiritualist ALL meet or exceed your qualificaions of, " a well rounded character with 15BAB, 4/6+ skills per level, tier 6 spellcasting and some useful class abilities"

But since you have issues WITH ALL OF THEM, then you're not actually saying what you'd personally choose to be. You have some "secret hidden qualification" that you're not sharing. Which is, ABLE TO DO EVERYTHING. Or at least that is what all your posts would have us believe.

Agreed on most points, except Cleric. Cleric archetypes (Besides Evangelist) have pretty much no useful class features, since Cleric has pretty much no useful class features besides casting.


My Self wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
ChaosTicket wrote:

Yes/no I would personally choose to be a well rounded character with 15BAB, 4/6+ skills per level, tier 6 spellcasting and some useful class abilities over a mix-maxed character with top stats in one area and severely lacking in another.

Again was standard are you basing things on? Im using the middle ground between low and high stats.

Seriously why are people so against being able to pick Point Blank Master as a feat? Its not like Im asking for level 20 Maximized Disintegrate 50 times a day.

AT this rate asking to remove Weapon Focus as a feat requirement would cause heads to explode.

A min maxed character IS what you're asking for.

What you meant when you said min-maxed is OVER/HYPER SPECIALIZED. A hyper-specialized character is only good at 1 thing and bad at other things.
An optimized character is also a min maxed character, one that gets the most benefits for the lowest cost, and these character often handle and are good at many situations.

An inquisitor, skald, bard, magus, oracle, summoner, cleric archetypes, druid, alchemist, hunter, investigator, shaman, occultist, mesmerist, and spiritualist ALL meet or exceed your qualificaions of, " a well rounded character with 15BAB, 4/6+ skills per level, tier 6 spellcasting and some useful class abilities"

But since you have issues WITH ALL OF THEM, then you're not actually saying what you'd personally choose to be. You have some "secret hidden qualification" that you're not sharing. Which is, ABLE TO DO EVERYTHING. Or at least that is what all your posts would have us believe.

Agreed on most points, except Cleric. Cleric archetypes (Besides Evangelist) have pretty much no useful class features, since Cleric has pretty much no useful class features besides casting.

Cleric has medium BAB which can be significantly boosted with spells.

Cleric has channeling which can be boosted with feats

Cleric has domain features.

And need we mention that the spellcasting is 9 level?


I am in agreement with Chess Pwn here, if your requirement is PBM, we have gone over how you can qualify for it, Play a Ranger, a Fighter or something that lets you count as one of those. Aside from telling you how to get that feat the board has also offered a lot of advice on other ways to attain most of the same without actually having the feat and discussed what you can do without the feat at all.

In terms of adding new spells to the spell list, there was even a suggestion for how to do that.

Going far outside the box of what a class was built to do can be fun and by burning a few feats, locking in a specific race and archetype combinations you can in fact have an Inquisitor with Breath of Life and PBM but not at level 1.

Are you trying to build a Solo character? Do you play in PFS or with a group of re-curring players? What are they bringing, or not bringing, to the table that you feel you NEED to be a melee-archer with expanded offensive and defensive spells?


I don't know, channel energy, domain, and getting free summon feats seem like some useful class abilities.

like, they don't have as many options or as many class features as other classes do. But they do have some useful stuff.

I do agree though that they are at the lowest end of qualifying.


Jesus is this thread still circling the PBM discussion?
The OP has made similar threads before and they don't resolve because it boils down to unless it gets PBM it doesn't work (false) yet to be a class with easy access to PBM is completely out of the question.

Take Bowstaff you Bane, Judgements and Enhancement bonus' carry over as it becomes a quarterstaff and you can full round of attacks on the same turn, that is the simple Inquisitor solution to PBM that they have access to from level 1.

Chess Pwn was right, you seem to have some hidden standard which has lead you to believe all the classes he mentioned (An inquisitor, skald, bard, magus, oracle, summoner, cleric archetypes, druid, alchemist, hunter, investigator, shaman, occultist, mesmerist, and spiritualist) are some how flawed to the point of being unplayable. And no, not having PBM does not justify that opinion.


I feel like the OP would be pretty happy playing a tristalt fighter/cleric/empyreal sorcerer, especially if he got to play an appropriately powerful race like a drow noble or gargoyle or drider with a reasonable point buy like 35.


why not just use the gestalt or mythic rules?


swoosh wrote:
I feel like the OP would be pretty happy playing a tristalt fighter/cleric/empyreal sorcerer, especially if he got to play an appropriately powerful race like a drow noble or gargoyle or drider with a reasonable point buy like 35.

But it wouldn't have 6+INT skills and skill boosts at 1st level. Plus, wouldn't the initiative be lower than that of an Inquisitor? And casting in armor would be an issue. Maybe if we had UMonk//Ranger (Illsurian Archer)//Cleric (Evangelist or Ecclesiastheurge)//Sorcerer (Empyreal wildblooded), we could get a functional class.


Claxon wrote:
You want an archer Inquisitor you worship Erastil, take Deadeye Bowman trait, you don't need an archetype at all, and choose the Chivalry Inquisition to get yourself a mount. Give you and your mount escape route and you no-longer are worried about provoking AoO for firing your bow, because your mount will just move you out of harms way. Point-Blank Master isn't necessary.

I've always wondered what happens if you choose Chivalry Inquisition on a Sacred Huntsmaster...


You get a two animal companions. Sorry I already thought of that days ago.

On the other side I could ask about getting Pounce for a melee character.

Spellcasters dont quite have a pinnacle ability but I can think of something to aim for. How about about being able to cast spells at-will.

I want greater potential in my characters. Ingame abilities have been divided among too many classes. Wizards have a spellbook and can theoretically learn every Arcane spell on their list but have to prepare each spell slot specifically. Sorcerers cast at will but can only learn a finite number of spells.

SO start with one and gain the others abilities. What do you get? The Arcanist is close.

Here's a combo from a while ago. a Barbarian/Cleric. Rage Prophet prestige multiclass tries that but its not a perfect combination. Personally I think a Cleric with Pounce would be better.

Actually there's something I can focus on. Why not take a Cleric that masters using Advanced Firearms or has Pounce with dual tomahawks? What would those take?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChaosTicket wrote:
Actually there's something I can focus on. Why not take a Cleric that masters using Advanced Firearms or has Pounce with dual tomahawks? What would those take?

Eh.

Worship Pirias for the throwing axe proficiency.
Ask your GM if you can get the Plains domain (he does have the Plant domain, so) + Anger Inquisition to beef up your attacks when needed.

As a dual talent human on a 20 point buy, you can go 15+2/14+2/14/10/13/10 if you don't like dumping, sticking to buff spells + summoning as a cleric. You'll still be able to cast 9th level spells with a headband, so, no big loss if you don't care about spell DCs.

Might do as a start?


As a sorcerer you can pick up runestones of power for extra spell slots and pages of spell knowledge for extra spells known. Also, a human can choose one extra spell known every level. Take the archetype that is int based and you can go far, maybe not every spell known but you can get all the useful ones.


Pounce wrote:
ChaosTicket wrote:
Actually there's something I can focus on. Why not take a Cleric that masters using Advanced Firearms or has Pounce with dual tomahawks? What would those take?

Eh.

Worship Pirias for the throwing axe proficiency.
Ask your GM if you can get the Plains domain (he does have the Plant domain, so) + Anger Inquisition to beef up your attacks when needed.

As a dual talent human on a 20 point buy, you can go 15+2/14+2/14/10/13/10 if you don't like dumping, sticking to buff spells + summoning as a cleric. You'll still be able to cast 9th level spells with a headband, so, no big loss if you don't care about spell DCs.

Might do as a start?

You made me laugh. You completely missed the key detail for a melee build AND Its your name "Pounce".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ChaosTicket wrote:
Pounce wrote:
ChaosTicket wrote:
Actually there's something I can focus on. Why not take a Cleric that masters using Advanced Firearms or has Pounce with dual tomahawks? What would those take?

Eh.

Worship Pirias for the throwing axe proficiency.
Ask your GM if you can get the Plains domain (he does have the Plant domain, so) + Anger Inquisition to beef up your attacks when needed.

As a dual talent human on a 20 point buy, you can go 15+2/14+2/14/10/13/10 if you don't like dumping, sticking to buff spells + summoning as a cleric. You'll still be able to cast 9th level spells with a headband, so, no big loss if you don't care about spell DCs.

Might do as a start?

You made me laugh. You completely missed the key detail for a melee build AND Its your name "Pounce".

It's only a "key detail" if you have an incredibly narrow viewpoint, and he covered Pouncing with the Plains domain if you actually bothered reading up on what was offered to you.

101 to 150 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Inquisitor Help: Too many options, not enough obvious winners All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.