|
The Alchemist, Bard, and Inquisitor are all hybrid tool-boxy classes with a little bit of a lot of things and a niche unique to them. How do they compare and contrast with each other?
Are they all roughly equivalent in raw capability or not?
Do they all scale equivalently or do some peak early or late?
Do they all work equally well in large or small parties or are some of them better off in smaller or larger groups?
Etc...how do they stack up when looked at side by side?
Thoughts?
It may be to early to tell with the Alchemist and Inquisitor, but I would put Inquisitor and Bard together in the "Friend of your party if not belle of the Ball" class, since they have a lot of abilities that help everyone, are always useful, but don't always "Shine".
Alchemists I would put more in a specialty category, as they aren't as universally helpful as the other two, but can do a lot of things that can help. I would almost put them with the summoner as a class that can solo as well as it can play with others.
The Summoner spell list is highly annoying to me, especially when compared to the bard's.
Depends on what you want to use the character for. I dont really see much point in comparing these classes with each other.
Suprizingly, I have found the Inquisitor and Alchemist to bring similar combat abilities to the table, while the Bard is completely different. Non-combat, Inquisitor and Bard start to fill similar niches as the face and monster identifier, but have very different feels while doing so.
Inquisitor has very high peak damage from self buffs, works well when paired with a partner but is greedy in this. Expect him to be a primary damage dealer. Brings nice divinations to the table out of combat, with solid intimidation. He takes a few levels to get going though for his judgement to ramp up, and he peaks when he picks up divine power.
Alchemist self buffs to be great at melee, but is a glass cannon. Alternatively, he works well as a mad bomber. Will do stuff out of combat that you don't need but others can't really fill. Has utility buffs, but needs to spend an ability to let others use them. He really does not need anyone else to be effective.
Bard party buffs, though is less of the star himself after the early levels. His best abilities need him to be paired with others. He is compotent on his own, but cannot match the other 2. His spells are often not best on himself and they have very different utilities than the others.
All 3 classes bring different things to the table and will be a good addition to many groups.
In terms of "power," I'd say that all three are roughly equal. It's really in how you play them. In terms of how they interact with a party, I'd say it's like this:
Alchemist: Inherently the most selfish of the three classes, and very much a damage focused class. Can choose to develop in a manner that allows her to buff allies, but overall the focus is on self improvement and different ways to kill her enemies (melee, poisons, AoE bombs).
Inquisitor: Very much a single target damage dealer with some great utility spells and lots of tricks to keep herself alive. She has a lot more potential to buff her allies, but again, the class is very combat focused.
Bard: Based solely on the APG variants of this class it is the most versatile of the three. Most bard builds contain a strong amount of group buffing capabilities, though a few have the ability to eschew this almost entirely (notably the sandman). Bard spells focus on buffing, light healing, party utility, debuffing, summoning, and battlefield control via illusions & enchantments. Bards can easily be built to be glass cannons thanks to the fact that Bardic Performance often affects everyone in the group, and it easy to apply in mid levels. Arcane Duelist, Sandman, the original bard all make good choices for this. In fact, the only commonality between the different bard options is that they all, in one way or another, maintain a focus on disabling and/or debuffing their enemies.
Overall, I'd say the bard stands apart from the other two because it simply has the most options in what sort of role it wants to play. If you like the flavor of a performance based caster/fighter, Bard is a wonderful and versatile choice.
It doesn't cost the alchemist much to pick up the infusion special ability. They get a discovery every other level, and a feat that they can use to pick up a discovery on every other level besides that.(thanks to the extra discovery feat) I don't think its fair to assume, from a perspective of "how well does an alchemist work with a group" that the alchemist won't pick it up. When they do its amazing.
The problem with the bard is opportunity cost. While adding +1 or +2 to everyone's to hit is nice, chances are pretty good that that bonus isn't going to all your party members, its only going to the fighter and whatever class it is the bard is replacing. You could easily be adding as much damage yourself by instead being an additional fighter, cleric, or rogue. You could also do whatever it is those classes do in addition to damage (like meat shielding)
The alchemists buffs on the other hand let the other party members do what they do a lot better while still allowing the alchemist to blast. An enlarge person infusion gives the fighter 10 feet of reach and a nice boost to damage, something that takes a wizard a full round Expeditious retreat and shield on your barbarian/two handed weapon fighter keep their ac up while they zoom around the battlemat mowing down enemies for you.
Alter self and disguise self can provide disguises for the entire party, something a wizard can't pull off till 13th level when they get polymorph. Not having it as a class skill doesn't hurt much, as the +3 won't matter that much with a whopping +20 to disguise checks.
False life is a good way to give the tank one more hit then they otherwise would have gotten. Blur and displacement add a second line of defense to AC, and prevent sneak attacks.
On top of that the bombs keep you damaging. They lack the save or die qualities of a true wizard, but the damage is nothing to sneeze at and the right discoveries can leave your enemies on fire,nauseated, and stuck in the middle of a smoke cloud. Touch AC doesn't scale well with level, so as you advance you only increase the chances of the bombs hitting.
with my alchemist it seems that i have a different role in every fight. For random encounters and mook fights i use a mutagen and do OK bow damage for a few rounds, and mayby toss a bomb or two. For tough fights everyone downs the buffs i handed out that morning and the alchemist sets everyone on fire. They're not as good as a wizard going full bore, but with nearly as many bombs as there are rounds of combat in a day they hold up much better than a low level.
|
It all really depends on what they are doing and what "role" they are trying to fill.
In my book the chart would look like this.
Combat (Melee)- Inquisitor=Alchemist>Bard
Combat (Ranged)- Alchemist>Inquisitor>Bard
Spellcasting (Offense)- Bard>Alchemist>Inquisitor
Spellcasting (Support/Control)- BardAlchemist>Inquisitor
Spellcasting (Healing)- Alchemist=Bard>Inquisitor
Party Face/Skill Monkey- Bard=Inquisitor>Alchemist
Overall Versatility- Inquisitor>Alchemist=Bard
So my list favors Bards for Support/Control, and offensive magic. The alchemist tops for ranged combat and healing, whereas the inquisitor ties for first in melee and as the party face, but beats both at overall versatility.
|
If I was ranking them
solo
Alchmist>Inquis>Bard
group
Bard>Inquis>Alchmist
Bard by far bring the most to a group. And saying a bard is not good at combat. This statment is so far from the truth its not even funny.
Inquis brings some abilitys to the group but over all is over showded by what the bard brings. Solo the inquis hase alot of ability that help.
Alchmist solo he hase every thing you need in one class. As part of a group he dose not bring any thing any other class can't do better.
As an example bard using 20 point buy
Human
Str 18
Dex 10
Con 14
Int 10
Wis 10
Cha 14
Feets: Martal Weapon Great Sword Lingering Preformance
Using his preformance his bounse to hit and damage incresses. Leaving his spell casting for utility and healing.
Melee with a bard ? Roll a fighter, he doesn't have AC nor can put hurt on enemies as much as other melee classes with 3/5 BAB can - Rogue and even Monk out damage bard easily. Grab a whip (<3 Treatmonk) if you are gonna go in melee with a bard, otherwise go with a bow - much MUCH safer and viable.
Damage ? Alchemist and Inquisitor win with 1 hand behind their back.
Nicely built bard can come close to Alchemist in DPR IF he hits with all of his attacks, which is lets be honest unlikely, and he ain't even in same category as Inquisitor.
Inquisitor>Alchemist>Bard
BUT - Displacement? Bard got. Haste? Bard got. Enlarge Person ? He does not have (but he does have UMD + Cha). Shield? Not very strong buff, either way past like 3rd level.
So on one end you've got bard for support - who've got song + more buffs per day than Alchemist or Inquisitor.
Alchemist? Party members need to waste turns to self buff, its a little better than Imbue With Spell Ability, just cause you don't have to waste spell and it doesn't have limit on level of a spell - still making party members (some with higher damage output than yourself) waste actions on buffs is something i personally would have hard time calling support, more like last resort.
Inquisitor - got some nice stuff, but best stuff he is keeping to himself (divine power,righteous might)
So as for buffs?
Bard>Bard>Bard>Inquisitor~Alchemist
Note: Bard wins here hands down, giving morale bonus not just on attack, but damage and saves.He can cast more buffs than Alchemist - oh wait ... alchemist doesn't cast, party members need to buff themselves, reason why Inquisitor and Alchemist are tied in support.
Skill monkey ? I vote Bard, on level 2 he practically got 8 ranks. Level 6 he got 10, surpassing Rogue and i didn't even count Int nor possibility of being Human, i just counted that you can plan your character a bit.Inquisitor 6, Alchemist 4. All through Alchemist primary stat is Int, it doesn't matter cause he can't compare with skills Bard and/or Inquisitor brings to the table. Next to that, most of his skills are already covered by either cleric or any other martial class.
Deeper analyses?
Bard got all knowledges and bonuses on all knowledges (better than Inquisitor), Inquisitor got most that matters and bonus on them for monsters, Alchemist got 2 - no bonuses no nothing. Alchemist on other hand got Disable Device(something other two do not have), but no disarming magical traps for him.
Party face ? Alchemist got 0. Inquisitor got all, but Cha is his true dump stat. Bard got all and Cha is his secondary stat, plus with 1 Skill Focus he can cover 3 skills - example Perform (Oratory), buffs that skill, diplomacy and sense motive too.
So skill monkey ?
Bard>Inquisitor>Alchemist
Spell versatility - 40% of bards spell list consists of enchantments, so he surely ain't winning here ... As for Alchemist vs Inquisitor its deeply personal choice, but i would say Alchemist cause he mixes Divine and Arcane.
Alchemist>Inquisitor>Bard
All through its ultra tough to compare classes that got so little in common in terms of play styles, i would say that Bard even if he can't keep his own in damage output versus other two, certainly compensate for it with his skills and buffs.
I haven't had a chance to play with an inquisitor yet. I've played a few bards under 3.5 and they don't seem to have changed that much.
BUT - Displacement? Bard got. Haste? Bard got. Enlarge Person ? He does not have (but he does have UMD + Cha). Shield? Not very strong buff, either way past like 3rd level.
The bard has blur and displacement... for himself. Not for the fighter, who needs it more. Imbue with spell ability is a cleric spell, it doesn't let you get access to the really nice wizard "self only" buffs.
So on one end you've got bard for support - who've got song + more buffs per day than Alchemist or Inquisitor.
Its not the quantity its the quality and the versatility. the bard has more rounds per day spread over 4 people... but how many of those people are going to be using the buff? Probably only The bard the fighter (since the bard usually replaces the rogue in a 4 man party. +3 to attacks damage and saves is nice. Mayby the cleric if they're malee oriented (something less common in PF than 3.5)
Alchemist? Party members need to waste turns to self buff, its a little better than Imbue With Spell Ability, just cause you don't have to waste spell and it doesn't have limit on level of a spell - still making party members (some with higher damage output than yourself)
If the alchemist is replacing the wizard they have roughly the same DPR if the alchemist goes all out. A rogue has to get very lucky to be able to out damage an alchemist.
waste actions on buffs is something i personally would have hard time calling support, more like last resort.
A fighters first action is often moving up to the enemy anywhere, popping a potion of expeditious retreat and then moving instead, or popping enlarge person and getting the attack of opportunity as the enemy comes to you is more than a fair trade. Also, since you can deal comparable if not better damage than a fighting type, it makes more sense to blow their action than yours in many circumstances.
Also remember that not every fight starts off with the party surprised: If a party knows there's going to be a fight and has time to glug the alchemists infusions they have a very significant power boost.
Class skills don't add nearly as much in pathfinder as they did in 3e. Anyone can pick up tumble and bluff if they want it: high int alchemists can match or even surpass low int bards in terms of skill-points.
The bard has blur and displacement... for himself. Not for the fighter, who needs it more.
What's stopping the bard from casting those spells on the fighter?
The bard has blur and displacement... for himself. Not for the fighter, who needs it more.What's stopping the bard from casting those spells on the fighter?
Whoops, thought those were self only for some reason.
|
|
4 party members
Bard
Fighter
Rogue ( made for Damage )
Cleric or Orical ( Made for melee )
At level 7 the bard can start there song and cast haste in the same round. (+1 attack at your highest base attack or +30 - 20 ft to your move ment +1 to hit and reflex save. +2 to hit and damage +2 sv. fear. total bounes for one round of buffing. +3 to hit +2 damage. +1 attack at your highest base attack or 30-20ft movement. +2 sv. fear.)
So what do the other two have that can compare?
4 party members
Bard
Fighter
Rogue ( made for Damage )
Cleric or Orical ( Made for melee )At level 7 the bard can start there song and cast haste in the same round. (+1 attack at your highest base attack or +30 - 20 ft to your move ment +1 to hit and reflex save. +2 to hit and damage +2 sv. fear. total bounes for one round of buffing. +3 to hit +2 damage. +1 attack at your highest base attack or 30-20ft movement. +2 sv. fear.)
So what do the other two have that can compare?
They can both replace the Fighter for DPS, rather than being significantly behind. They can't do it all day, but they can both peak very high, significantly higher than the bard, and bring added casting support.
They can both replace the Fighter for DPS, rather than being significantly behind. They can't do it all day, but they can both peak very high, significantly higher than the bard, and bring added casting support.
No they can't replace Fighter - DPS wise, maybe and that output is not constant for Inquisitor ... otherwise they simply can't, cause they can't withstand punishment - Inquisitor can perhaps be divine rogue, but there is no way in hell Alchemist can withstand melee same way bard can't.
|
|
No they can't replace Fighter - DPS wise, maybe and that output is not constant for Inquisitor ... otherwise they simply can't, cause they can't withstand punishment - Inquisitor can perhaps be divine rogue, but there is no way in hell Alchemist can withstand melee same way bard can't.
I... don't know about that Zod, I've seen a couple really nasty mutagen focused alchemists.
No they can't replace Fighter - DPS wise, maybe and that output is not constant for Inquisitor ... otherwise they simply can't, cause they can't withstand punishment - Inquisitor can perhaps be divine rogue, but there is no way in hell Alchemist can withstand melee same way bard can't.I... don't know about that Zod, I've seen a couple really nasty mutagen focused alchemists.
All i said was pure theory crafting from looking over classes so i am willing to accept that i am wrong. My group got one game going for now so we didn't had chance to play around with Inquisitor nor melee Alchemist, we've got mad bomber through, and i can reliably say that he sucks as support, his extracts count as potions, so he can't even put extend on Barkskin nor anything like that and fighter and monk always need to gulp down their own buffs, but thats off topic.
Way i see it, he could go with armor and get Barkskin, maximum stat on dex, etc, but than his DPS would suffer. On top of that his combat options are either 3 natural attacks (which don't get me wrong, are awesome cause he can have them as soon as 2nd level) or a choice of some simple weapon, neither is great choice on mid levels imho.
I can't understand why it's quite common opinion that alchemists cannot withstand melee. I mean most of us are fine with rogue taking twf and running straight to melee, while alchemist has the same hitpoints and potential to much higher AC. With str-mutagen and enlarge person he deals enough damage to be respected by rest of the party. Throw in one class of barbarian and you're in for a quite ridiculous strenght. I'm throwing this out in many threads, but I just won't admit that my alchemist isn't a melee-viable guy =).
Jon, my player is using Rapid Shot instead of TWF and he is half orc, his attacks are something like +21/+21/+21/+16 (with haste), so he always hits that touch AC. Doing if i am not wrong at the moment 6d6+12 with each bomb. As i said, mad bomber is there to stay i can see his viability and his damage potential, what i can't comprehend is how can Alchemist be viable in melee past lets say level 10, he either uses simple weapons or got 3 natural attacks, he can pump his str for +12, nothing to sneeze at i admit, but its still 3 attacks and than he is unable to drink potions without moment of clarity witch would mean he needs to take 2 levels of barbarian to use his own spells.
As for potions, he needs to literally waste 5k gold for lets say 1 day of buffs (all tho Barkskin won't last him that long), so thats not viable either, for 4 days of buffs you can get lets say amulet of mighty fist lighting.
They can both replace the Fighter for DPS, rather than being significantly behind. They can't do it all day, but they can both peak very high, significantly higher than the bard, and bring added casting support.No they can't replace Fighter - DPS wise, maybe and that output is not constant for Inquisitor ... otherwise they simply can't, cause they can't withstand punishment - Inquisitor can perhaps be divine rogue, but there is no way in hell Alchemist can withstand melee same way bard can't.
Considering my group's primary DPS is an Alchemist, I heartily disagree with your assessment. The class has at least the same AC as a bard or rogue, more potential HP thanks to spells, and an can hit high numbers on DPS with a strength build. Now, my friend also is a half-orc and uses a falchion every once in a while, but a longspear is a perfectly valid simple weapon to utalize his strength. Personally, I find the mad bomber a less viable build because he can only full attack a couple of rounds a day before running out of bombs.
The inquisitor can exceed the fighter for DPR if he gets divine power and uses his judgement and bane. He can do that for a number rounds/day equal to his level. It takes some work, but it is completely possible. With any 1 of those 3 buffs up, or a couple of his others, he will perform admirally in a fight. He takes resource management, but in the hands of a skilled player he can dominate the battlefield.
Melee bards work fine. They wont be the stars, but they can easily put out enough damage to be relevant. They will likely have the same or better AC than your rogue thanks to a buckler and the same armor (though some do TWF), and have other means of avoiding damage like mirror immage and invisibility.
|
|
The melee alchemist would be well served by picking up an exotic weapon proficiency simply due to the fact that they can wield it in one hand gaining all attacks they would normally get from BAB and make the natural attacks with the bite and other claw. Couple this with several free daily potions of haste, enlarge person, bulls strength, and transformation there is no reason why they shouldnt be getting off 4-6 attacks a round.
Jon, just to clarify, that build doesn't include any other buffing, right? I didn't do the math, just asking.
Because I'd like to point out that an Alchemist at that level could use Form of the Giant I to get even better numbers, assuming it's not included.
I also have been looking at making a melee Alchemist for my next char, and it looks like a very viable build into mid to high levels to me.
he can pump his str for +12, nothing to sneeze at i admit, but its still 3 attacks and than he is unable to drink potions without moment of clarity
I'm a bit confused: where is this limitation coming from?
he can pump his str for +12, nothing to sneeze at i admit, but its still 3 attacks and than he is unable to drink potions without moment of clarityI'm a bit confused: where is this limitation coming from?
+8 from mutagen, +4 from rage, in rage you cannot drink potions, cast spells nor do anything other that you deem needs concentration or patience.
+8 from mutagen, +4 from rage, in rage you cannot drink potions, cast spells nor do anything other you deem that needs concentration or patience.he can pump his str for +12, nothing to sneeze at i admit, but its still 3 attacks and than he is unable to drink potions without moment of clarityI'm a bit confused: where is this limitation coming from?
There is an entire set of rage powers and varient build associated with drinking booze. Drinking potions is no different.
Ok. Yeah, I agree with Caineach, I don't think drinking potions is a "concentration or patience" related ability like casting spells.
Also, by the time you have +8 from mutagen you should have a +6 str from Form of the Giant or Elemental Body.
edit: actually, I'm not sure of that. Is it 14th you can have +8 mutagen and 16th you get 6th level?
There is an entire set of rage powers and varient build associated with drinking booze. Drinking potions is no different.+8 from mutagen, +4 from rage, in rage you cannot drink potions, cast spells nor do anything other you deem that needs concentration or patience.he can pump his str for +12, nothing to sneeze at i admit, but its still 3 attacks and than he is unable to drink potions without moment of clarityI'm a bit confused: where is this limitation coming from?
True, i thought that it came later instead of uncanny dodge, not instead of fast movement.
Cool, thanks, as I thought. Includes long term buffs but not short ones. Mostly, I wanted to see you confirm so that others would know that example wasn't a "fully buffed" alchemist and try to take it apart by assuming you were spending combat rounds to get to that level of ability.
I think people are kinda slamming the Bard a bit much. In standard small 4 man parties the Bard's core abilities (buffing) aren't as critical but in larger groups of 5-6 PCs with multiple melee PCs, cohorts and summoned/called creatures the ability to maintain a high level morale bonus to hit and damage, haste the party, etc can serve as a critical force multiplier.
Bard is a mediocre 4th man but a stellar fifth man simply because he can provide utility in so many functional groups.
Inquisitor is really nice for single target DPR and skill monkey functions. If the DM typically uses multiple opponents or mooks then the Inquisitor can tend to lag behind.
I've played around the least with the Alchemist. It seems like a very selfish class in many ways but the ability to tank up a caster equivalent is pretty nice. I'm not so certain of the Barbarian/Alchemist multiclass as it seems like it would be MAD as hell and pretty dubious as a character concept but it seems okay from a theorycraft perspective.
May i ask how is it MAD ? He needs same physical abilities that Alchemist needs. As for concept, off the top of my head, think of it like mutagen "boost up", your temper gets really silly, for roleplaying sake's you could go as far as using it same way Frenzied Berserker used his Frenzy, when damage procs, etc.
Sorry for double post, but just to address the rest.
Carbon, it got to do with patience and concentration part. I am not saying that it got to do with concentration part, but patience he surely do. Move action to pull out a potion, standard action to gulp it down, full round action devoted to something as simple as drinking, i would say you need patience and clear head for that.
As for bard being mediocre 4th level man, he really isn't in right combination. Yes, you will need rest of the group to cooperate with you on what are they gonna play so you can see is it viable or not. For example party for our upcoming Kingmaker campaign will consist of a bard, paladin, arcane trickster and Druid with animal companion, if one of our friends decide to join us, he will probably be playing band-aid cleric cause he wanna try him out, so i am not even counting him buff wise.
Carbon, it got to do with patience and concentration part. I am not saying that it got to do with concentration part, but patience he surely do. Move action to pull out a potion, standard action to gulp it down, full round action devoted to something as simple as drinking, i would say you need patience and clear head for that.
Drunken Brute barbarian variant from APG drinks alcohol during rage to save rage points. It's a move action to retrieve the alcohol, and move action to drink it. He can also drink potions with move action. So if the core rules don't exactly say what you can do in rage, I think APG clears this one out. You surely can drink potions during rage.