War of Immortals: Old Friends and New Faces

I wonder if we could use this metric to reiterate Hunter for 2e, whether as a class archetype for Ranger, Druid, or Magus. (Of course, you'll want to fully port Magus into post-Player Core first...) I know nothing of the 1e Hunter Iconic, mind, but I wonder if you could extrapolate the Animal Focus feature into generally channeling primal/natural force. If a Magus class archetype, into the weapon is also a possibility. (Or even through the companion, a la 1e Shaman???) At least SOMETHING to start with, I suppose.

My guess is they're holding off on Hunter stuff until they're ready to face down the beast in the jungle that is adapting the Shifter to PF2.

Yeah, like, "inquisitor" has other meanings, but in the context of a religious servant, everyone knows why that word was chosen.

I will note that the Inquisitor was released in the APG in 2010, and in the early days the Pathfinder brand leaned in to "edgy" in a way that Paizo doesn't want to do anymore. So it's possible that they chose "inquisitor" specifically for the same reason they wouldn't want to use it now.

Oh yes, THAT issue...{sigh} Paizo: Cleaving to social justice precepts in spite of its founders' "best" efforts.

(I think of myself as a Social Justice Invoker. D&D 4e sense, not 2e/3e/5e sense.)

Yup! I want to be clear here that I'm not really judging PF1 for its choice back then. I liked PF1's edge a lot, even though it was a little hit-or-miss (loved Calistria and the runewells, wasn't so fond of the Grauls). I don't think "Inquisitor" was a great name, but it made more sense back then. It's just not the right pick for PF2.

I'll admit that my money was on y'all using the Thaumaturge as the base, restricting the class to picking up a holy symbol or deity weapon and possibly getting more divine specific item abilities. The reasons given for picking the ranger instead make a lot of sense, so I'm sold on that choice. It's just not the one I originally would have guessed before seeing those reasons.

Thaumaturge is definitely "the other Van Helsing"and could have been the vindicator's foundation in a not-so-distant reality, though I think it would still probably have been a larger number of changes with fewer total conceptual permutations at the end.

Me? I'm liking what I see here, for all three Class Archetypes.

Although can someone remind me how many class Archetypes there were until now? Because the only one I can think of is the 'Way of the Spellshot' for Gunslingers in Guns & Gears.

The original iconic's outfit was literally a reference to a comedy skit about the Spanish Inquisition, the project that killed upwards of 150,000 people. The class was designed as a morally dubious religious agent rooting out heretics against their god, which is exactly what the Spanish Inquisition professed to be about. It was not subtle. It was not even a little bit subtle.

...That's what Imrijka original color scheme was a reference to? Now I feel silly for thinking it was to Alucard from Hellsing. Still, makes more sense for her to be in the colors of the goddess she actually worships.

AnimatedPaper wrote:

I'll admit that my money was on y'all using the Thaumaturge as the base, restricting the class to picking up a holy symbol or deity weapon and possibly getting more divine specific item abilities. The reasons given for picking the ranger instead make a lot of sense, so I'm sold on that choice. It's just not the one I originally would have guessed before seeing those reasons.

Thaumaturge is definitely "the other Van Helsing"and could have been the vindicator's foundation in a not-so-distant reality, though I think it would still probably have been a larger number of changes with fewer total conceptual permutations at the end.

Oh! I think it would be interesting to offer a Divine Thaumaturge option. Perhaps calling it the Theurge?

Honestly, sitting on it, I think Paizo made a serious misstep with the inquisitor thing. I think they should have added a new subclass for the swashbuckler dedicated to globetrotting and staging improbable heists. Then they could have given Imrijka an elaborate story update where, after losing faith in her old methods, she decides to wreak havoc in the Gravelands by stealing Tar-Baphon's superweapons and cool monuments. Then they could have kept the outfit unchanged. :)

Although I am excited to see the archetypes, as a huge fan of playing a Bloodrager in WotR, I can't help but be a bit sad for the new Bloodrager.

I guess we are no longer channeling our sorcerous might into fueling our rage and sparking new abilities.

The new Bloodrager has some cool ideas and abilities, but I will miss the old Bloodrager. RIP buddy.

We really just need some magus class archetypes or the like. One for barbarian-types, one for rogueish/swashbuckler-types, and... maybe generally just work on expanding the spell tradition access for the class, too. It's not too late for them to Remaster the class!

Me? I'm liking what I see here, for all three Class Archetypes.

Although can someone remind me how many class Archetypes there were until now? Because the only one I can think of is the 'Way of the Spellshot' for Gunslingers in Guns & Gears.

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

The original iconic's outfit was literally a reference to a comedy skit about the Spanish Inquisition, the project that killed upwards of 150,000 people. The class was designed as a morally dubious religious agent rooting out heretics against their god, which is exactly what the Spanish Inquisition professed to be about. It was not subtle. It was not even a little bit subtle.

...That's what Imrijka original color scheme was a reference to? Now I feel silly for thinking it was to Alucard from Hellsing. Still, makes more sense for her to be in the colors of the goddess she actually worships.

Don't feel too bad. I had the exact same thought all these years.

Although I am excited to see the archetypes, as a huge fan of playing a Bloodrager in WotR, I can't help but be a bit sad for the new Bloodrager.

I guess we are no longer channeling our sorcerous might into fueling our rage and sparking new abilities.

The new Bloodrager has some cool ideas and abilities, but I will miss the old Bloodrager. RIP buddy.

It is true that this means the Incredible Hulk would no longer quite be a Bloodrager (Daemon bloodline, I presume). That's basically how I myself understood Bloodragers--their blood trace sometimes takes over when that blood power is needed...

(Now we need a post-Player Core port, I suppose, of Stand Us--sorry, Summoners.)

There were five class archetypes before this, although some were due for rebuilds. Wellspring mage was a favorite of mine, and I've always wanted to try out a flexible caster wizard.

I don't think we know what the main inspiration for Imrijka's outfit is... Sometimes we get some insights from Wayne Reynolds but I don't believe I've seen any in the years since the APG released. The Spanish Inquisition skit has always been my assumption but I also always think of Carmen Sandiego when I see her in art. Perhaps Alucard was mentioned in design notes for Wayne. I'm not sure if anyone would even remember at this point.

BotBrain wrote:

Michael Sayre wrote:

it means you end up with much more diversity of build available because so many of the ranger feats already touch the core concept territory that Imrijka embodies (Monster Hunter, Swift Tracker, Eerie Traces, and other ranger feats fit well within her story and the needs of her conceptual space, arguably much better than most...

Does that mean you guys consider how you would go about creating that classes iconic when making classes? That's a cool tidbit if so. Might try that if I ever try making that homebrew class I keep meaning to make.

It's varied a bit over the years depending on the specific team and circumstances at play, but for pretty much all of my time designing at Paizo, concepting and executing the iconics has been a big part of our process.

The relationship between the design team and our artists has really grown and flourished over the last several years, and with the coordination of our Director of Visual Design, Sonja Morris, that's led to us getting to work much more closely with and provide more of our insights to the artists who bring our ideas to life, getting art that really fully embodies the fundamental ideas behind our classes and character options.

For characters like Droven, Nhalmika, Samo, and Nahoa, we knew who they were and who they'd become visually before the classes were through development, so that allowed us to sync those classes and those characters together very tightly. When you can look at an iconic and instantly have a good idea of what it does and how it does it, the class itself is likely to see more play, the books sell better, and you see more widespread adoption of the surrounding ideas.

With the vindicator, our process was a little different but ultimately had the same needs and solutions. Ask 5 people what the PF1 inquisitor was, you'll get 5 different answers, and 3 of them will be about the mechanics of the class rather than its concepts. It was a class that was very "of its system" in...

Interesting. Thanks for sharing!

We really just need some magus class archetypes or the like. One for barbarian-types, one for rogueish/swashbuckler-types, and... maybe generally just work on expanding the spell tradition access for the class, too. It's not too late for them to Remaster the class!

I think Skalds could be the "bard-magus". I can see it taking on a similar duty to the Envoy in starfinder 2e, where by hitting enemies, some bonus occurs. Perhaps too much to cram into a class archtype, but certainly feels like a possibility as far as a vauge wish goes.

Gaulin wrote:

Damn, all of these sound wicked. I'm especially happy for my good friend who's favorite 1e class is Inquisitor, both the vindicator and avenger sound right up his alley. And bloodrager sounds perfect; can cast spells while raging and get to add damage to them?! Sign me up.

Would anyone remind me (if it's been teased already) what other class archetypes are to come in this book?

It's 5 Archetypes total in WoI, with the remaining two being Warrior of Legend (Fighter CA where you get to be Achilles, Achilles' Heel and all) and Sneaschel (unknown).

Divine Mysteries have 2 more known, Battle Herald Cleric and Palatine Detective Investigator.

Please let at least ONE of these be a divine wave caster chassis with some mechanic other than spell strike!

I like the idea of a vindicator of Lamashtu with the monster hunter feat chain; a monster hunter hunting monster hunters.

…For characters like Droven, Nhalmika, Samo, and Nahoa, we knew who they were and who they'd become visually before the classes were through development, so that allowed us to sync those classes and those characters together very tightly.

This is illuminating. I find this a poor approach - it needlessly ties broad character concepts to singular individuals and informs the class from an incredibly narrow perspective. Look at the response to Nahoa’s class in the feedback to the Exemplar playtest - given not everyone wanted to play loincloth-Maui expies the lack of options for all kinds of different cultural “heroes” (like, medium or heavy armored) was to my mind completely a result of this design path. Not to mention that this makes an interesting point by way of a complete lack of visual, Iconic representation for the Commander and Guardian, neither of whom have been introduced months after that playtest. Though, even without the Iconic Guardian, it was still pretty clear that there was an extremely narrow concept at the core that again, didn’t allow for broader, non-Taunt “defenders”. Sure, the playtest classes are just designs, more added later yada yada yada.

Obviously I’m a terse nerd on the other side of the world endlessly railing about Paizo’s missteps, and am not privy to the broader or even more specific steps of visual-Iconic-aided class design, but so far, it seems with those four in particular, and as far as my personal biases about Golarion should be taken into account, I’m four for four. Though, to be honest, there isn’t much wiggle room for “has a gun” with Nhalmika.

When you can look at an iconic and instantly have a good idea of what it does and how it does it, the class itself is likely to see more play, the books sell better, and you see more widespread adoption of the surrounding ideas…

I’m not sure this is true. Now internal Paizo stats and analytics from booksales and attendant figures from organised play might bear this out, but I imagine there are way more factors at play in the uptake of certain concepts.

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

I don't really understand why the explanation would create any controversy. It's pretty clear, right?

Quote:

Our intent is to provide our players with a more heroic title for a class mechanic that we know appeals to a large portion of our audience.

It's like I said above: The class mechanic appeals to a wider range of players, so they didn't want the mechanic to be named something that connotes a specific sinister flavor.

Then what about assassin? Not to mention some that aren't necesarily negative but that can be associated to misrepresenting IRL cultures like magus (a magus is a priest in zoroastrianism, so a "magus" would be closer to a cleric than a magical swordmsan). But regardless of that, I feel that if the whole reason is because "it has negative connotations" then you can find negative connotations about pretty much anything in existance, so I'm curious why inquisitor in particular is so horrid to some when there's equally as bad examples in the games already. Btw, I'm not asking for a rename either. Vindicator is as good as a name to represent the thematic niche the archetype has (though I liked avenger a bit more for inquisitor since it reminds me of the 4e avenger class too) but I find curious that people focus solely on the inquisitor in this kind of discussions when there's other examples of names that also have negative connotations.

It's partly the mismatch, and I imagine part of the reason that it's less of an issue for you is that PF1 did some legwork redefining "inquisitor" for you and others familiar with that iteration. If you've played it some already, it's nice established as a class, just like "barbarian" is for most folks.

For a lot of new folks, the word "inquisitor" leads pretty quickly to "inquisition" and a general sense of "rooting out enemies of the church-state, and probably some innocents too". At best, they're coming in with WH40k's preconceptions, which are... not terribly far from that. If the deity is Asmodeus or Zon-Kuthon, "inquisitor" fits just fine; very on brand. If the deity is Pharasma or Nethys, it's... potentially a little weird. Pharasmins rooting out hidden undead works all right, but what does an inquisition of Nethys look like? Then if we look at Desna or Cayden Cailean, it's completely at odds.

Some classes probably take similar levels of liberty with the meaning of the class name, but "inquisitor" is definitely something that carries very common baggage. Why put in extra work convincing new players, "You can play good inquisitors too!" when you can just... use a name that doesn't require that work? "Vindicator" sounds like you are going and proving somebody or something right, which could be proving someone's innocence, without being so positive a word that you can't be proving someone's guilt.

Personally not as big of a fan of the Avenger requiring a deity, as I like the idea of them being a Rogue that was better at tracking folks down, but otherwise I like all three archetypes as a whole, and will probably come to embrace the Avenger's final take.

(But I suppose in hindsight if I wanted that I could just make a Rogue with the Ranger, Bounty Hunter, or Assassin archetype)

Michael Sayre, Director of Rules and Lore wrote:

…For characters like Droven, Nhalmika, Samo, and Nahoa, we knew who they were and who they'd become visually before the classes were through development, so that allowed us to sync those classes and those characters together very tightly.

This is illuminating. I find this a poor approach - it needlessly ties broad character concepts to singular individuals and informs the class from an incredibly narrow perspective. Look at the response to Nahoa’s class in the feedback to the Exemplar playtest - given not everyone wanted to play loincloth-Maui expies the lack of options for all kinds of different cultural “heroes” (like, medium or heavy armored) was to my mind completely a result of this design path.

Flipside-

Exemplar is one of the most popular classes we've ever created and right now ranks among the most popular classes for new characters built across almost every venue we have insight into.

Surveys, gaming platforms, and character builders both show it is more popular than even a lot of core classes. (The animist is not quite as popular but shares the distinction of being a playtest class that is more popular than several core classes.) Similarly, Guns & Gears is one of the most popular books of this edition cycle and has sold through multiple print runs faster than most books that don't have "Core" or "Advanced Player's Guide" in the title.

Conversely, a class that you'd think is popular based on the forum conversations around it, the thaumaturge, is dead-last on all those same lists. It's mechanically strong and has a whole lot of variety in its builds, but the broader audience doesn't really know what it is, the iconic doesn't help them understand that, and so only a small and very invested portion of the playerbase engages with it while the wider audience ignores it.

I feel like the value in developing the class with an idea of who the iconic is that when you do this you can ensure that the class is capable of supporting a character like the iconic. Not that the class won't be able to support completely different visions. I will reserve my concerns about playing an armored or ranged exemplar, which I previously expressed in my playtest survey, for after I see the final class.

the thaumaturge is so good though aaah that's heartbreaking! We clearly need more thaumaturge content. We need to revive its image. We need to bring back the thaumaturge iconic, and bring them back hotter, sexier, more covered in insane paraphernalia.

the thaumaturge is so good though aaah that's heartbreaking! We clearly need more thaumaturge content. We need to revive its image. We need to bring back the thaumaturge iconic, and bring them back hotter, sexier, more covered in insane paraphernalia.

I for 1 support this agenda!!!

I feel like the value in developing the class with an idea of who the iconic is that when you do this you can ensure that the class is capable of supporting a character like the iconic. Not that the class won't be able to support completely different visions. [...]

Very much so, yeah. Making sure the character option does the thing and that the thing is something people want to do is huge. That doesn't mean it's the only thing the class or option can/should do, but if it doesn't draw people in to begin with, they'll never discover what else might be under the hood.

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

the thaumaturge is so good though aaah that's heartbreaking! We clearly need more thaumaturge content. We need to revive its image. We need to bring back the thaumaturge iconic, and bring them back hotter, sexier, more covered in insane paraphernalia.

I for 1 support this agenda!!!

cover them in candles! there aren't enough candles!

Flipside-

Exemplar is one of the most popular classes we've ever created and right now ranks among the most popular classes for new characters built across almost every venue we have insight into.

Surveys, gaming platforms, and character builders both show it is more popular than even a lot of core classes. (The animist is not quite as popular but shares the distinction of being a playtest class that is more popular than several core classes.) Similarly, Guns & Gears is one of the most popular books of this edition cycle and has sold through multiple print runs faster than most books that don't have "Core" or "Advanced Player's Guide" in the title.

Conversely, a class that you'd think is popular based on the forum conversations around it, the thaumaturge, is dead-last on all those same lists. It's mechanically strong and has a whole lot of variety in its builds, but the broader audience doesn't really know what it is, the iconic doesn't help them understand that, and so only a small and very invested portion of the playerbase engages with it while the wider audience ignores it.

Wow, that’s shocking! Do you think this could be skewed due to the platforms from which the data was sourced? (Eg Pathbuilder is the most popular char builder and given its independent status I doubt its data was part of this? Ditto for foundry chars since I believe Foundry doesn’t collect that kind of data.) I run/play in a lot of games and I see Thaums all the time while I’ve seen Exemplars only in dedicated playtest games.

Not trying to cast doubt but Thaum regularly ranks really highly in informal polls conducted on most of the biggest online paizo communities while Exemplar isn’t even released. Hearing the latter is more popular than the former just screams “data error” to me tbh. But then again that could just be my own bias due to my own experiences frequently seeing Thaum so who knows.

I think thaumaturge is definitely very popular among people who love talking and arguing about the rules. :P

Color me interested. I will have to read more about this in a bit. A Crimson Templar might now be a little more possible!

If I had to make a guess on why the thaumaturge isn't as popular with the wider audiencies is likely in part because of its name and (as Michael Sayre said) because of its iconic too. Name-wise, thaumaturge is a weird name because most people don't even know what a thaumaturge is, while those who DO know what a thaumaturge is wouldn't associate it with the things the class itself does. This confusion likely increases when you see Mios and see a bulky dude with a multi-layered armor with tons of cloths and pouches all over them. However, I don't think its a problem for the thaumaturge to not be a popular class at all. Unlike the kineticist in which I'm almost counting the days to see the release of the aether element, the thaumaturge in its current state kinda covers all the possible fantasies it would want to cover? I could see a few feats added to the class, but implements-wise I think the class doesn't really need anything.

I'll just point out that there also was the quite popular game Dragon Age: Inquisition and you were playing The Inquisitor. That game was about kicking demon ass for the church, so no relation to the historical inquisition.

Also a bit sad that the bloodline influence seems to have been removed for the Bloodrager and that Imrijka's iconic red coloring is gone. The blue version looks much less memorable, IMO.

Thanks for the insight, that's good to know! I've played so many Thaumaturges, I've basically exhausted the class, so it's interesting to hear that. I'm glad that Paizo made it, and I hope that we still get the occasional weird class like that.

But. Part of making a Thaumaturge for me is coming up with a new explanation for what they're doing for each character. Mis-singing the song of all that is, using an occult ritual to borrow the knowledge in the stones of Geb's buildings, or relying on an information network of rats. It's never just playing "a Thaumaturge who X" like I would play "a Wizard who is an artist". So I can definitely see how it would have an accessibility problem.

I'm very excited for Exemplar, along with everyone else. X)

pixierose wrote:

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

the thaumaturge is so good though aaah that's heartbreaking! We clearly need more thaumaturge content. We need to revive its image. We need to bring back the thaumaturge iconic, and bring them back hotter, sexier, more covered in insane paraphernalia.

I for 1 support this agenda!!!

cover them in candles! there aren't enough candles!

I maybe just be playing too much WoW, but this just made me think of the current Kobold questlines they have out now.So many cool Candle mogs.... Now I need Candle armor in pathfinder... hmm.

I'll just point out that there also was the quite popular game Dragon Age: Inquisition and you were playing The Inquisitor. That game was about kicking demon ass for the church, so no relation to the historical inquisition.

The writers actually specifically mentioned that their intent was to reference the historical office of Inquisition.

Which, by the way, is still operating and active to this day, albeit under a more discreet name. I think it says it all that the historical connotations are so strong that even the currently active operations have less to do with how that word is perceived than that specific historical incarnation.

also, like, doesn't Dragon Age as a series deal a ton with the idea that the church is super oppressive towards various marginalized groups? I seem to have internalized that from several years being surrounded by DA2 Discourse nerds.

Another big reason I’m surprised is that the largest class survey I’m aware of (conducted by Mark Seifter himself) ranked Thaums first out of all classes: https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/s/hjElI6uWOv

(Not a random sampling, but 1500 people is a lot of people)

I wonder… If Demiplane data is a big source here, Exemplars and Animists would naturally have a big advantage because I believe the playtest content is free in the char builder whereas everything else needs to be bought right? It’s like how the one free subclass on DNDBeyond always ranks as the most popular subclass on that website.

also, like, doesn't Dragon Age as a series deal a ton with the idea that the church is super oppressive towards various marginalized groups? I seem to have internalized that from several years being surrounded by DA2 Discourse nerds.

Yeah, the first two Dragon Ages laid a lot of foundation RE: "the chantry is not your friend, and you probably shouldn't trust them" and specifically the third game was about playing around on the edge between that juxtaposed with "nevertheless, they might be your best tool for saving the world" which is appropriate for a game that's supposed to be about making hard choices.

But notably DA:I made "the Inquisitor" just some random passerby who happened to touch the maguffin before it exploded, there was absolutely no requirement that you were a true believer or even did what the higher ups wanted. Dragon Age also buys itself some rope here because the world is one where the Gods are canonically absent, and magic inherently opens you up to demon possession.

Bloodragers are Grey Wardens; that's pretty metal. Nothing wrong with being a sorcerous brawler, but I think this new lore is a bit cooler

I'll just point out that there also was the quite popular game Dragon Age: Inquisition and you were playing The Inquisitor. That game was about kicking demon ass for the church, so no relation to the historical inquisition.

I have pretty clear memories of cutting down a lot of mages, arm-in-arm with the Templars, in that game... and the head of the church I allied with was a brutal spymistress, fond of assassinating her enemies. You also clash with that setting's Fantasy Ottomans at one point, the Qun, scary for how they convert other people to their foreign faith. One of the members of my party advocated for slavery as a system equally or more fair than freedom with wealth disparity, and another was a self-hating racist whose romance depended on not arguing with her about hating your shared cultural heritage.

The Inquisition of DA:I is absolutely not clean.

I know my own Thaumaturge idea is a half-elven denizen of Tian Xia (Tian Xia mostly to explain why she'd have ready access to a jiu huan dao) who works with the occult equivalent of waveform interference. Her first implement is a literal bell--one more akin to bells associated with feng shui than any other type, with groove-pockets on the exterior to fit esoterica in. Ringing the bell is HOW she presents the esoterica, whether or not it's the special reaction--the qualities of the esoterica (one primary and one or two secondary) interact through constructive and destructive interference in the midst of the bell's soundwaves to produce the effect she's looking to visit on her foe. (Hence the jiu huan dao that would ultimately be her second implement--it's the only weapon I could find that I could readily associate with sound. >>;;;; )

As you might have guessed, adventuring with her would be a...noisy...affair when a fight breaks out. (Well, noisier than usual.)

SkyknightXi wrote:

I know I'm a little more aware of the Inquisitions not being just the Iberian nightmares--notably the French Inquisitions. And understanding that the term "inquisitor" MEANS "investigator". (Same root as "inquire" and "inquisitive".) Of course, the French Inquisitions were no fun for the Albigensians, despite them being much more restrained about torture (they even appropriated the right of torture to themselves as a way to keep torture from being used with any frequency at all, by appealing to papal authority! Then came Torquemada...).

Yeah, like, "inquisitor" has other meanings, but in the context of a religious servant, everyone knows why that word was chosen.

There's also a pop culture element, re: other names.

Like it's not wrong to say that Barbarian and Witch have historically very negative connotations (not just in how they were used but in their meanings) but they've also been heavily co-opted, modified, and somewhat reclaimed in pop cultural contexts (although I wouldn't really mind seeing barbarian go, I guess).

Using the word Witch to imply someone was a practitioner of evil magic and literally sold their soul for power would probably get you weird looks these days. If anything the pendulum has almost swung entirely the other way (I've seen some people express discomfort at the use of the word in fantasy media because of its more modern uses and a desire to have the word protected instead).

"Inquisitor" has not only not really been recontextualized in any way, but its usually used as a direct reference to the worst of the historical Inquisition on purpose. Properties like Warhammer use the term Inquisitor to specifically evoke that archetype.

In that respect it feels reasonable that Paizo might find the term awkward for specifically heroically-coded characters.

Plus the Vindicator is somewhat mechanically distinct, giving it its own name allows it to operate on its own merits better, imo.

I'll also say that I'm sincerely hoping Barbarian goes the way of the dodo in a hypothetical PF3. Berserker centers the supernatural rages better with less baggage, IMO.

also, like, doesn't Dragon Age as a series deal a ton with the idea that the church is super oppressive towards various marginalized groups? I seem to have internalized that from several years being surrounded by DA2 Discourse nerds.

Not in the context of the inquisition of that game, which specifically was created to stop the demonic incursions. The world of Thedas itself is a pretty crapsack world dark fantasy setting, though.

The Inquisition of DA:I is absolutely not clean.

Which wasn't what I was alluding to.

I'll also say that I'm sincerely hoping Barbarian goes the way of the dodo in a hypothetical PF3. Berserker centers the supernatural rages better with less baggage, IMO.

Yeah, I'm on record that PF3 is probably going to have a Berzerker and a Martial Artist instead of a Barbarian and a Monk. The Barbarian and Monk made it into the core rulebook when "tradition and mutual intelligibility with the whole family of related games" was much more valuable than it eventually became in the life of PF2.

If they were not "core classes" they might have gone through a similar transformation as the Inquisitor because of baggage with both the name and the theming (the monk being the clearinghouse for all of the anime and wuxia tropes makes it probably have to wear too many hats.) A real problem with porting the PF1 inquisitor was that the original class was a strong chassis with a real grab bag of loosely related themes and mechanics.

keftiu, I don't know why, but you are exactly the person I would expect to know things about Dragon Age. XD

One thing I want to say: Across this thread and elsewhere, I've seen a few iterations today of, "This story's version of the Inquisition is different, because the heretics really are evil in-universe." I really think that take misses a step. It's not 100% wrong, but it sort of nags at me.

When a setting like Warhammer Fantasy declares, "well, actually, the bigotry is kind of justified in-universe because witches are canonically bad news", that's a choice the authors made. Not to bully WHF (I'm simplifying its lore to make a broader point), but the authors in that instance are choosing to transfer a real-world atrocity--in that case, organized religious witch hunts--and concoct a setting in which the atrocity is justified.

Warhammer in general plays a lot with the idea of "diagetically-kind-of-justified atrocities". You know, lots of "no, but these enemies really are pure evil savage teeming hordes, so it's cool to genocide them". In-universe, that's a correct statement, but out-of-universe, people might be excused for asking "why did you want to write that? Might a story like that encourage a certain worldview?"

I like Warhammer Fantasy. Not here to condemn it today. It's just a useful example, because it's pretty gleefully unsubtle.

When you create a setting in which a church is justified in rooting out evildoers, and you call that practice an inquisition, you're choosing to tell the story of a "just" Inquisition. That's a choice you made, not an inescapable truth of neutral worldbuilding. I'm not saying that's good or bad--it's kind of messy and really depends on you knowing what you're trying to say--but it's definitely no less fraught than any of the other examples we're discussing here.

EDIT: There's a really common trope in fantasy and sci-fi stories of the "willing servant race". When handled badly, these stories tend to inadvertently recycle a lot of vile antebellum propaganda for their worldbuilding. Is it okay when it's a fantasy species that genuinely likes being servants? Well, that's the in-universe argument. But why would you write it like that?

For a lot of new folks, the word "inquisitor" leads pretty quickly to "inquisition" and a general sense of "rooting out enemies of the church-state, and probably some innocents too". At best, they're coming in with WH40k's preconceptions, which are... not terribly far from that. If the deity is Asmodeus or Zon-Kuthon, "inquisitor" fits just fine; very on brand. If the deity is Pharasma or Nethys, it's... potentially a little weird. Pharasmins rooting out hidden undead works all right, but what does an inquisition of Nethys look like? Then if we look at Desna or Cayden Cailean, it's completely at odds.

If we're going with title-as-what-they-do, then vindicator has many more issues than inquisitor. So a vindicator of Cayden Cailean...vindicates what? If Inquisitor is a clear yet inappropriately named servant for some of the Gods, then Vindicator is an unclear concept for any God. IMO. I'd also argue it's not inappropriate for almost any God. Any faith organization, no matter how vague or hippy dippy, can use an employee whose job it is to investigate threats to the faith, the faithful, or the church oganization. And it's easy enough to draw other inquisitor missions from their domains (Hey Cayden Cailean Bob, we're getting complaints from our followers in Exampleton that the city's mayor is suddenly cracking down on everyone's rights and becoming more despotic. Go investigate, inquire why. Question the local officials, figure out if there's any sort of supernatural threat to freedom here or just bog standard corruption...either way, respond as Cayden Cailean might wish you to...).

Also personally, I very much like the backstory/concept of a decent person (unknowingly) working for a corrupt organization. Very common movie theme, with loads of plot hooks the GM can bring in. A bright-eyed, believes-in-the-mission inquisitor fits the bill. Calling them a vindicator does not resonate. So I'm not a huge fan of the name change.

But...I also don't think it's a big deal. If 'vindicator' lets a wider variety of players feel comfortable playing the class archetype, I get it. Good reason for a name change. Besides, let's face it, home games are their own thing. The tables that prefer the inquisitor name can continue to use it, or allow players to use it to describe their own characters when they wish.

I never thought of Inquisitors as always being evil.

However, I have always thought of them as being a sort of "Church Police."

While the Inquisitors of Spain back in the late 15th through early 19th centuries are almost universally considered to be "evil," I never thought that all Pathfinder Inquisitors of being so.

"Good" churches like Sarenrae's are in need of those who can root out the rot in their churches as much as the "Evil" churches are in need of those who can root out the infiltrators in theirs.

If it's misunderstood meanings of what an Inquisitor is that's the problem, the cure is a proper education and less limited thinking.

The main historical example of an 'Inquisition' was the Spanish one, which spent much of its time hunting Jews that attempted to practice their faith within Spain. Closest currently existing organization to the Spanish Inquisition that I could name might be Iran's 'morality police' or some of Scientology's nastiest people.

In a sense they are 'Church Police', but that does not mean 'expose priests that steal from the congregation, apprehend vandals who deface the church' but 'actively persecute rival faiths and those looking to leave the faith'.

Keeping the term for evil faiths and introducing Vindicator as a non-evil version makes a lot of sense, IMO.

keftiu, I don't know why, but you are exactly the person I would expect to know things about Dragon Age. XD

One thing I want to say: Across this thread and elsewhere, I've seen a few iterations today of, "This story's version of the Inquisition is different, because the heretics really are evil in-universe." I really think that take misses a step. It's not 100% wrong, but it sort of nags at me.

When a setting like Warhammer Fantasy declares, "well, actually, the bigotry is kind of justified in-universe because witches are canonically bad news", that's a choice the authors made. Not to bully WHF (I'm simplifying its lore to make a broader point), but the authors in that instance are choosing to transfer a real-world atrocity--in that case, organized religious witch hunts--and concoct a setting in which the atrocity is justified.

Warhammer in general plays a lot with the idea of "diagetically-kind-of-justified atrocities". You know, lots of "no, but these enemies really are pure evil savage teeming hordes, so it's cool to genocide them". In-universe, that's a correct statement, but out-of-universe, people might be excused for asking "why did you want to write that? Might a story like that encourage a certain worldview?"

I like Warhammer Fantasy. Not here to condemn it today. It's just a useful example, because it's pretty gleefully unsubtle.

When you create a setting in which a church is justified in rooting out evildoers, and you call that practice an inquisition, you're choosing to tell the story of a "just" Inquisition. That's a choice you made, not an inescapable truth of neutral worldbuilding. I'm not saying that's good or bad--it's kind of messy and really depends on you knowing what you're trying to say--but it's definitely no less fraught than any of the other examples we're discussing here.

EDIT: There's a really common trope in fantasy and sci-fi stories of the "willing servant race". When handled badly, these stories tend to inadvertently recycle a lot of vile...

Can I just add with that edit, I think thats one of the reasons I really like the Kobold change. Making kobold eggs magic sponges that can benefit from a powerful artifact or leader makes the dynamic a much more beneficial and clear dynamic, with a in built reason for Kobolds to leave a particularly bad leader as well.

But yeah I am in agreement with you, there are certain types of stories that irk me the wrong way. Or if I enjoy a piece of media with in it, i'm kind of enjoying it in spite of it not because of it.