Interesting two classes. Inquisitor seems to be most like 4e's Avenger, of all classes. Judgments are cool, but this guy sort of boils down to a less effective paladin. Honestly, even if the judgments were at will, rather than limited per day, this guy struggles to have a true purpose. He doesn't deal damage as well as the rogue, he doesn't help the party like the bard, his spells aren't as potent as the cleric's.
They get bonus tactical feats as part of their progression, which are useless for NPCs like the lone church assassin. And despite their tactical feats, nothing about the class suggests or aids teamwork. Why don't their judgments aid allies as well as the inquisitor?
The guy feels rather all over the place, and it feels he ends up even worse than the bard, since he has no teamwork aiding ability.
If you keep tactical feats in, I'd also expand the judgments (which I'd rename blessings) to aid the inquisitor's allies within a certain range as well. I might even suggest allowing the inquisitor to not only gain the benefit of its tactical feats without its allies having the feat, but to allow the allies to gain that benefit too.
BUT...I don't really think the concept calls for a super-teamworker. I'd retool most of these bonuses to be more powerful and personal. I'd drop the tactical feats, and raise his damage ability significantly. Also, as an inquisitor, I'd give him sensory abilities to see through deceptions, detect evil, etc.
Right now, he stands as a melee character without melee attack or damage. He's cool, but mechanically a dud.
Also, tactical feats are currently terrible. You essentially have to spend two feats (yours and your buddy's) to give you and your buddy a very specific and situational bonus. I'd be surprised if anyone took it even if you rolled them all into one feat called 'Teamwork' the way it functions now.
I would go as far to say drop the spells all together give them a d10 HD and full base attack but I will admit I prefer warriors so I have a bias
|
Also, tactical feats are currently terrible. You essentially have to spend two feats (yours and your buddy's) to give you and your buddy a very specific and situational bonus. I'd be surprised if anyone took it even if you rolled them all into one feat called 'Teamwork' the way it functions now.
Why does every class HAVE to contribute to the effectiveness of the other characters directly. Does the Fighter give the rogue any help directly other than a timely flank? Or vice versa?
And it seems many are missing the Solo Tactics class ability at 3rd that allows the Inquistor to allow him to act as if his teammates DID have the tactical feats.
--Jingle Bell Vrock
...edited for bassackwards thinking
Only the inquisitor gets the bonus with solo tactics. The other party members grant the inquisitor the ability to use its bonus feats.
|
I wold go so far to say it's a play test and not how it will end up in the book. look at cleric and Wizards from Beta testing of the core book. nothing like thay ended up in the book but thows changes where a direct effect of play testing how thay where writen and then tweaked. If this wold have have been done by another company thay wold have only done in house play testing and we wold not even know the direction that the classes desine wold be going in.
Also, tactical feats are currently terrible. You essentially have to spend two feats (yours and your buddy's) to give you and your buddy a very specific and situational bonus. I'd be surprised if anyone took it even if you rolled them all into one feat called 'Teamwork' the way it functions now.Why does every class HAVE to contribute to the effectiveness of the other characters directly. Does the Fighter give the rogue any help directly other than a timely flank? Or vice versa?
And it seems many are missing the Solo Tactics class ability at 3rd that allows the Inquistor to allow him to act as if his teammates DID have the tactical feats.
--Jingle Bell Vrock
...edited for bassackwards thinking
Let me vrock this out real quick.
1. I don't know that every class does have to contribute to the effectiveness of other characters directly. The inquisitor does neither that nor provide a meaningful 'solo' benefit.
2. I'm not missing Solo Tactics. I mentioned that his tactical feats seemed to suggest a teamwork focus that was otherwise lacking in the class.
And tactical feats are still terrible choices for other classes. They aren't even that good for the inquisitor, but since he gets them for free, their opportunity cost is nil at this point.
Taking two feats to gain a +2 to attack, while flanking is the best feat on the list, and that's a harsh harsh price to pay.
I wold go so far to say it's a play test and not how it will end up in the book. look at cleric and Wizards from Beta testing of the core book. nothing like thay ended up in the book but thows changes where a direct effect of play testing how thay where writen and then tweaked. If this wold have have been done by another company thay wold have only done in house play testing and we wold not even know the direction that the classes desine wold be going in.
Obviously. This material was given to us to preview for our feedback. That the tactical feats are too weak and too limited to be worth two players taking a feat for them is part of my feedback. That the inquisitor doesn't seem to have much to do, lacking any focus, is another part. Are you somehow missing that? That I'm participating in the playtest with this criticism?
As another bad inquisitor point, why would a low Ref class get Evasion?
In response to Kain, at least as far as the Tactical Feats are concerned...
2. I'm not missing Solo Tactics. I mentioned that his tactical feats seemed to suggest a teamwork focus that was otherwise lacking in the class.
I was worried about this as, too, at first. It seemed odd to me that the Inquisitor would have access to anything promoting teamwork, as the rest of the class seems quite self sufficient. Then, it occurred to me, the tactical feats that the Inquisitor gains for free don't represent how good he is at working with other people, they represent how good he is at USING other people.
He's a flexible, opportunistic fighter who can take advantage of his companions to maximize his own damage and prowess. If he gave bonuses to other people because of his free Tactical Feat usage, then I would wonder why it was part of the class, but as it stands I think it fits the flavor very well.
Oh, and Jason Bulmahn posted in another thread that he thought the high Fortitude Save / low Reflex Save + Evasion was wonky too. We'll just have to see where it ends up.
|
Personally, I think the inquisitor is made of win and awesome. It could use a little cleaning up, and some of the abilities need to scale a little better, but that's what the beta is for: working those kinks out. As it stands, the inquisitor is an excellent monster hunter class, a group-tactics fighter that's part Solomon Kane and part Van Helsing. I really like it, and one of my players is chomping at the bit to play one. ^_^
Jeremy Puckett
It needs to be stealthier. Because, ...
Nobody Expects The Spanish Inquisition!
Personally, I think the inquisitor is made of win and awesome. It could use a little cleaning up, and some of the abilities need to scale a little better, but that's what the beta is for: working those kinks out. As it stands, the inquisitor is an excellent monster hunter class, a group-tactics fighter that's part Solomon Kane and part Van Helsing. I really like it, and one of my players is chomping at the bit to play one. ^_^
Jeremy Puckett
I LOVE the concept of the Inquisitor. It is the mechanics I find severely lacking. He doesn't have an effective way to help his companions or deal damage. He doesn't even have a particularly effective way to resist damage, unlike the fighter or some of the wizard capstones.
I do hope to see Solomon Kane and Van Helsing inquisitors. At the moment, they are both better off as paladin/ranger/cleric mixes.
Personally, I think the inquisitor is made of win and awesome. It could use a little cleaning up, and some of the abilities need to scale a little better, but that's what the beta is for: working those kinks out. As it stands, the inquisitor is an excellent monster hunter class, a group-tactics fighter that's part Solomon Kane and part Van Helsing. I really like it, and one of my players is chomping at the bit to play one. ^_^
Jeremy Puckett
I LOVE the concept of the Inquisitor. It is the mechanics I find severely lacking. He doesn't have an effective way to help his companions or deal damage. He doesn't even have a particularly effective way to resist damage, unlike the fighter or some of the wizard capstones.
I do hope to see Solomon Kane and Van Helsing inquisitors. At the moment, they are both better off as paladin/ranger/cleric mixes.
It seems to me the inquisitor will do just fine with damage. They can get just about any weapon from a diety, and they have the damage judgement and bane ability.
Bane is more flexible then a paladin's divine bond because it can be used against more targets then axiomatic can for instance. And while smite evil is more potent then any of the judgments, they are far more flexible, and can be used against any target, not just evil ones. They can also be used against multiple targets instead of just one. So I would say a paladin is better at laying into the big bad evil guy, the inquisitor still does it pretty well, but will be a beast if in a fight with a whole bunch of similarly typed enemies (or not similarly typed since it can be switched to a new type). Basically from level 5 on, the inquisitor does 2d6 extra damage for as many rounds as he has levels. Thats nothing to shake a stick at.
At a glance the class seems to have contracted the MAD disease. Its a melee build so it needs to be strong*. It has light armor so it needs dex. It also needs con. The spells need wisdom. It's high skill points lend itself to intelligence.
*I have sat down and not ran any numbers, but it does not seem to do enough damage to matter off the top of my head.
I also agree with all of Kain's statement's so far.
I would suggest giving it better armor proficiencies so it does not need dexterity. Allowing it to be a charisma based caster which synergies with the social skills needed to find, and influence heretics to cease their activities would be nice. They could also get a bonus to sense motive and perception when it deals with particular issues(mostly regarding his faith/religion)^.
Assuming my idea got across, Strength, Constitution, and Charisma are now the top attributes.
I have other ideas as well, but none of them seem sufficient to stop the potential MAD.