RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Denouncer(Inquisitor)
Every faith decries the sins of the wicked, sending missionaries to other lands to preach the faith. Missionaries are often protectors and agents sent to facilitate conversion and root out heresy . A Denouncer preaches of the wickedness of the enemy and reveals their weaknesses. With the aid of allies and divine magic, the Denouncer calls down judgment upon them.
Class Skills: The Denouncer’s class skills are Bluff (Cha), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Disguise (Cha), Heal (Wis), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (All) (Int), Perception (Wis), Perform (oratory) (Cha), Profession (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Spellcraft (Int), and Survival(Wis). These replace the standard inquisitor class skills.
Proselytizer (Ex): The first lessons a Denouncer learns are how to speak clearly and and with conviction so that the faithful can hear and understand the sins of the wicked. As such, the Denouncer gains a bonus to Diplomacy and Perform (oratory) of half her class level. This replaces the Stern Gaze ability.
Quantify the Sins (Su): At 3rd level, as a standard action, a Denouncer may make a monster knowledge check regarding the enemy combatants against a DC (10+the highest enemy's CR). On a success one ally (plus one additional ally for every 5 the check result exceeds the DC) also gains the benefit of all of the Denouncer's active Judgments for that combat. The allies must be able to see and hear the Denouncer and she can only make one such check per combat. This replaces the Solo Tactics class feature.
Bonus Feats: At 3rd level, the Denouncer takes a bonus Skill Focus (Knowledge) feat at third level and every 3 levels thereafter. This replaces the Teamwork Feats.
Repentant Strike (Su):At 5th level, the Denouncer can force the wicked to beg forgiveness for their sins, using a swift action to declare her next melee attack a repentant strike. A successful attack deals damage normally and the target must make a will save (DC 14+Wis) or be subjected to the effects of a forced repentance spell with a caster level equal to her class level. This ability can be used a number of times per day equal to half her class level. This replaces the Bane ability.
Compel the Sinful (Su): At 12th level, the Denouncer can expend two uses of Repentant Strike to modify one of her spells, forcing all targets of the spell to be subjected to the effects of her Repentant Strike ability, as if she had made a successful melee attack against them. This replaces the Greater Bane ability.
Special: Denouncers strictly adhere to their faith and any Denouncer who knowingly slays a faithful loses their judgment and divine casting abilities until they receive an atonement.
I've got a lot of worries on this one. First, let's just look at it from a stylistic/presentation perspective. The name alone needs an extra space between "Denouncer" and "(Inquisitor)"...same thing for "Survival(Wis)"...and you should lowercase your referenced class abilities. Under the Quantify the Sins ability, I don't really know what a "monster knowledge check" means. I'm guessing you intend for it to be a Knowledge skill check where it varies depending on which type of monster you're trying to identify, but you should use the proper game terminology for it. Even so, I don't see how knowledge of a monster's capabilities (both abilities and weaknesses) translates into granting access to an inquisitor's (Su)pernatural judgments. Then, under Bonus Feats, we get "At 3rd level..." which is then repeated "...at third level and every 3 levels thereafter..." and this kind of oversight makes me feel like you're not proofreading your work. Same goes for the double "and and" under the Proselytizer ability and the "...will save (DC 14+Wis)..." which should be "...Will save (DC 14 + Wis modifier)..."
It's really important that you reference the way game terminology and information gets presented in existing archetypes and across the various rulebooks. As-written, this write-up would be an editor/developer's nightmare just based on the number of corrections they'd have to make. And, if they have to make this many fixes in a 450-word assignment, that raises a huge flag on how many they'd have to make if you were given a 20,000-word adventure to write.
Now, setting aside the presentation and stylistic stuff, let's take at look at your actual archetype idea. It's a firebrand, judgment-inflicting inquisitor with a major focus on the forced repentance spell (which is a pretty potent spell meant to target one creature at a time). You're granting this 4th level spell effect (which normally isn't attainable until an inquisitor reaches 10th level) as a 5th level class ability usable a number of times equal to half their class level? See anything wrong with that?
Then, we get the Compel the Sinful ability at 12th level (just two levels beyond when forced repentance would normally be available) so that you can combine it as a quickened effect riding on top of one of the other inquisitor's spells "forcing all targets of the spell" to be subjected to the forced repentance as if they'd made a successful melee attack against them? Huh? This is all kinds of broken. And that's the core underpinning of your archetype's raison d'être.
So, with all of these flaws, I DO NOT RECOMMEND this archetype design to advance to the next round.
Total Points: 1 Point
Recommendation: Not recommended for advancement
Comments In Detail
Name & Theme (.5 point)
Weak name and weak theme match.
Mechanics (.5 point)
Quantify the Sins scares the heck out of me. As a 3rd level ability, this is going to power up low level groups tremendously. Healing in particular will be a game changer. The DC is so low that it will be in play all the time (the Denouncer will often Take 10, and its hard for me to see how they couldn't arrange to Take 20...)
At 5th level, the Denouncer is going to have 5 shots at inflicting forced repentance on the toughest opponent each day. Becoming Prone is a big deal. It's a -4 penalty to AC, and uses a move action to stand up, which provokes an AoO. This could be the start of a chain of events that ends up taking down a serious opponent without much resistance...
This archetype is therefore incredibly front-loaded and that's a knock against it.
Awesomeness (0 points)
Just not that awesome. You run around telling opponents they're Bad Bad People? And somehow everyone with you powers up and gets all sorts of bonuses or resistances? Regardless of their alignment, professed religion, etc.?
Template (0 points)
Lots of template issues but I'm really dinging you for the save against the Repentant Strike. As written, the save will be enormous. I suspect you meant "Wis Bonus" but that's not what you submitted and I'm not going to second guess you when critiquing the submission. As written, this save is just off the charts broken.
Context (0 point)
Who takes this class? What player thinks "I want to be halfheartedly engaged in conflict but busy b*~~%ing out my opponents while my buddies get all the glory?"
Director of Brand Strategy
|
From the get-go I'm not quite sure what to expect here. Your description of what a denouncer is doesn't sound all that different from what I understand the baseline inquisitor to be. You need to be much clearer on what this archetype is and it should grab me in that first sentence and make me want to play one or put one in an adventure.
The stylistic/typographical errors Neil brings up would have been my next point, but rather than point out the same mistakes, I'll just second his critique. It looks like you were worried about word count and cut some spaces where you thought it would earn you some breathing room. In the end, a turnover needs to be at word count and correctly styled for a developer to be able to work with it. Either inconsistency takes about the same amount of time to fix and would make me hesitant to give you an assignment to do actual material to be published.
Digging into the mechanics, it looks like this is an inquisitor/bard hybrid, but what does it really do? Ok, the swap of different skills to receive a 1/2-level bonus is understandable and fairly sound (if a little safe) design. Quality of sins, however, doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Not only is there no such thing as a "monster knowledge check," but the process of sharing any of the inquisitor's judgements seems an odd design choice. It doesn't fit with the theme, first, and second, it really stretches the credibility of the class feature system. I can see how it seems like a 1:1 swap with solo tactics, but one shares the benefits of feats (which, in theory, anyone can take) while the other shares specific class abilities without any restriction. This would be like a rogue making a check and then sharing rogue talents, or a barbarian sharing rage powers.
Neil's already gone into why repentant strike and compel the sinful are overpowered and I agree with his assessment. Thematically, this spell certainly fits with your archetype, but the implementation of applying its effects as class features needs improvement.
I don't think this archetype displays the type of work deserving of the RPG Superstar name, and therefor DO NOT RECOMMEND it for advancement. Perhaps the voters will feel otherwise. Best of luck.
Proselytizer: Makes sense, good thematic swap.
Quantify the Sins: Hmm. This is an easy DC to make--assuming CR-appropriate challenges, as long as the character has 1 rank in the skill, she's going to have at least +3 more than the required DC. Frex, at 1st level she'd have 1 rank + 3 class skill + 0 or more Int = +4, compared to a CR 1 enemy that's DC 11, so she only needs to roll an 8 or higher on the d20 to succeed, and that's if she doesn't have an Int bonus. Letting someone else use your class ability is pretty buff--paladins don't get that until aura of justice at 11th level, frex.
Bonus Feats: One, losing the solo teamwork feats is a major tweak to this class, that's an iconic element of the inquisitor. Strange choice. Two, this just means the Quantify ability is going to end up even easier than before (the net effect is about a +1 increase in the number of allies you can give your judgment).
Repentant Strike: Hmm. Bane only lasts 1r/level and this lasts 1r/level for [level] uses/day, so this is more advantageous because you can keep striking different enemies until they're all prone and crying and you've won the battle. You also got sloppy with your terminology here ("DC14+wis"), probably because you were running very close to the max word count. Ooh, and you're giving this ability at level 5, when you couldn't actually get the spell until level 10, and they get it as part of a melee attack rather than spending an action to cast a spell. Yeah, that's too soon, too good.
Nice idea, good theme, but I don't think you thought out the extent of the power of the abilities you're swapping in. There are several weaker abilities that you could use to ramp up to the final powers (command being a significant example), but this one basically cannonballed into the deep end of the power pool.
RECOMMENDATION: I do NOT recommend this archetype design for advancement in the competition.
It's a firebrand, judgment-inflicting inquisitor with a major focus on the forced repentance spell (which is a pretty potent spell meant to target one creature at a time). You're granting this 4th level spell effect (which normally isn't attainable until an inquisitor reaches 10th level) as a 5th level class ability usable a number of...
I'm agreeing with a lot of what you're saying here, but I've got to say something about the forced repentance. This actually is a problem with the forced repentance spell itself - the spell has EXACTLY the same casting time, components, range, duration, saving throw, SR and effect (become prone) as the first-level hideous laughter that bards get at second level (and since Inquisitors have effectively the same spell progression, this is a totally valid comparison).
The only differences between the spells is that hideous laughter DOESN'T break on attack (while forced repentance does, making it LESS POWERFUL of a spell) and forced repentance is actually more limiting in targets - if the Denouncer used his limited power on a non-evil creature or one that had the evil subtype, it would be wasted.
There are stylistic problems with this archetype. But overpowered abilities in Repentant Strike and Compel the Faithful? Not really.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
The name is a little weak and conceptually this isn't much different from a regular inquisitor, but I like a lot of the things you've done with the abilities. Yes, taking away the teamwork feats is a big change, but that's not entirely out of bounds for an archetype. There are ranger and paladin archetypes that get rid of spellcasting, after all.
I think the bonus feats change is a power hit, but not enough of one to balance giving ALL of your judgments to multiple allies (with the low DC, it might be most if not all of your party).
I like the theme of the forced repentance bit, and losing bane is a big hit to your melee power, so whacking people to hit them with the spell had better be good. It might be too good, given that the duration lasts beyond you hitting them. Then again, it only affects evil targets WITHOUT the evil subtype, and it's mind-affecting, and it ends as soon as they can't see you or they get attacked, so it's not a world-beating effect by any means. Still, it's a spell that you can't even cast yet, and you get to do it (on a weapon hit, not at range) multiple times per day. It's kind of overpowered, but I could live with it if you had some other limiters.
Unfortunately, you really kick it up a notch with allowing its use as a rider on your spells. That puts it WAY over the top. Slap it on top of any area or multi-target spell, and you are getting a quickened chain spell version of what is already one of your higher-level spells, PLUS you could add it to a spell with Medium or Long range to get the effect against distant enemies, ones for whom the effect will last much longer (since they are apt not to get attacked any time soon).
Too much.
Congrats on making it into the contest, and best of luck!
I'm with the judges here, I really don't see how this guy operates mush differently than a regular inquisitor, except that he focuses on on particular spell tactic. Also, the obvious lack of proof-reading make the reader predisposed to not liking the class, because they need to keep figuring out what the garbled text is tying to say.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 4
,
Star Voter Season 6
aka raidou
|
Patrick, I loved the potential fun to be had with your Seeds of the Spirit Totem. I'm happy you chose one of the new classes to work with, as that shows you're willing to step up and throw caution to the wind. Bold choice, so let's see what your Denouncer has to offer.
Proselytizer (Ex): The first lessons a Denouncer learns are how to speak clearly and and with conviction so that the faithful can hear and understand the sins of the wicked. As such, the Denouncer gains a bonus to Diplomacy and Perform (oratory) of half her class level. This replaces the Stern Gaze ability.
This is a fine choice here. Your job is basically to "preach to the choir" about the wicked (Diplomacy) and do it with lots of fire and brimstone (perform). You aren't extracting information out of anyone, and you are so sure of yourself you don't concern yourself with what others are thinking. Nicely done.
Quantify the Sins (Su): At 3rd level, as a standard action, a Denouncer may make a monster knowledge check regarding the enemy combatants against a DC (10+the highest enemy's CR). On a success one ally (plus one additional ally for every 5 the check result exceeds the DC) also gains the benefit of all of the Denouncer's active Judgments for that combat. The allies must be able to see and hear the Denouncer and she can only make one such check per combat. This replaces the Solo Tactics class feature.
You know, up until this moment I had thought there was a greater ability, spell, feat, or something that allowed an inquisitor to share his judgments with his allies. I can't seem to track such a thing down, if it exists. Anyway, I like the ability, and I like replacing Solo Tactics to get it. Normal inquisitors are paranoid loners trying to purge heresey from within. Their abilities are self-centered, and rightly so. This archetype unites the faithful to purge known external enemies, so it makes thematic sense to join with others to beat back the wicked. Having said all that, the knowledge mechanics to achieve this are a bit fiddly for my tastes. There's room for revision here.
Bonus Feats: At 3rd level, the Denouncer takes a bonus Skill Focus (Knowledge) feat at third level and every 3 levels thereafter. This replaces the Teamwork Feats.
Aren't you already getting bonuses to knowledge checks? This feels like overkill. It's also not terribly exciting.
Repentant Strike (Su): At 5th level, the Denouncer can force the wicked to beg forgiveness for their sins, using a swift action to declare her next melee attack a repentant strike. A successful attack deals damage normally and the target must make a will save (DC 14+Wis) or be subjected to the effects of a forced repentance spell with a caster level equal to her class level. This ability can be used a number of times per day equal to half her class level. This replaces the Bane ability.
Free quickened 4th level spell up to 10 times per day? where do I sign up? Seriously, this is very easily abused and not a good call.
Compel the Sinful (Su): At 12th level, the Denouncer can expend two uses of Repentant Strike to modify one of her spells, forcing all targets of the spell to be subjected to the effects of her Repentant Strike ability, as if she had made a successful melee attack against them. This replaces the Greater Bane ability.
Kind of like a "Penitent Spell" metamagic feat. Yeah, I still think this is too easily abused. It can become an easy encounter-ending effect, and you can do it a bunch of times.
Patrick, this archetype is okay. Not mind-blowing or anything but I'd place it in the middle of the pack. I think the Denouncer does a couple things well enough to set it apart from a standard inquisitor, but I don't think you used your best judgment on some other abilities (get it? judgment? har, har). It could also use another pass for style and clearness. All said, I'm not ready to extend a vote yet without reading the rest, but I'm not ruling you out. Good luck!
I like the theme and you kept it flavorful. I like the ability names. It's a decent implementation of the theme.
I think the last sentence of the introductory paragraph should be discarded.
I don't like the effect of Quantify the Sins.
|
Instead of piling on I'm just going to say what I like here. I like the name. Ignore the critics about the name. It's compelling. I love the description. It builds up and has momentum, and by the end of it I was just about to bust out loud with a Samuel Jackson line from Pulp Fiction. It had that kind of effect on me.
I can't be a fair judge of this or any Inquisitor class archetype right now. I have an player with an Inquisitor in my group who is the bane of my game. I suspect the whole class is slightly broken in the hands of a determined whiner. So, you're on my sort list by default. If you don't get bumped by eight others that I feel strongly about you can count on me.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6
|
Not much to add to the feedback here. I think dialed down this would be a fun archetype, but as it stands, I'll have to put it on my pass list.
Had to call-out a little defense of my spell - it doesn't allow a second save, which is an edge over hideous laughter, and because of that 2nd save, hideous laughter's usually a bad choice of spell to use against creatures not of your type. It's not the world's strongest 4th level spell, but then hideous laughter's an extremely effective 2nd level spell that a single class gets at 1st. In general, it seemed in keeping with the inquisitor's existing offensive spells when I designed it, which is always a factor in design. Not saying it's spell perfection, but spell balance does involve considering the class you're giving it to.
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8
|
Name and concept: It might seem more appropriate for an inquisitor to act against the enemies of the faith rather than talk, but that will depend on the specific abilities granted.
Archetype mechanics, expression of the concept: Class skills: Loses Climb, Stealth and Swim, gains all Knowledges plus oratory. Overall, this seems like a slight step down, since she doesn't actually do anything useful with Perform except earn a few silvers.
Proselytiser: Again, only half of this ability has a significant game effect.
Quantify the Sins is pretty good. It might be a little better than Solo Tactics, but so far, that seems OK.
Bonus Feats: The denouncer gets still better at monster lore checks, but I don't think that will break the game.
Forced Repentance: Better look that up .. It seems strong for 5th level. Does "her class level" mean the denouncer's level? In that case, twice a day to start with, and given that it adds an attack roll and melee range to the Will save that the spell already allows, it's not as good as it looks. A free round of attacks from the party might do more damage than a bane weapon, or it might not.
Compel the Sinful: On the other hand, this seems too much, given the open-ended possible number of targets.
The Special note is a very situational drawback - it may or may not ever come into play, depending whether the GM wants to screw over the denouncer or not.
Wider relationships: After all that, I still wonder whether it's appropriate for an inquisitor.
I have to say the Seeds of the Spirit Totem were a bit weird and story-oriented as well. I hope the author can get around to giving some concessions to straightforward hack-and-slash at some point, for broader appeal.
Overall, it seems a bit talky and the emphasis on Knowledge and Perform disconnects to some extent from dramatic game play. I'll come back to it, though, as a fair-to-middling entry.
Denouncer(Inquisitor)
1.Is the Archetype conceptually interesting?
2.Are the mechanics of the Archetype interesting?
3.Are the mechanics of the Archetype balanced and well executed?
But rather than simply adding up the marks for a final score I'm gonna interpret them as a point in 3-dimensional space and the final mark of your submission will be the length of the vector between the origin and this point.
Note that my ranking doesn't need to directly correspond with my votes, as other factors like: Strength of your item submission, mood, my horrorscope and other random stuff still factor in. Also note that this scheme is highly subjective and only mirrors my perception and opinion about your archetype submission.
Conceptual Mojo (CM): 2, It is a cool theme, but in my eyes not really far enough from the baseline inquisitor to really warrant an archetype.
Mechanical Mojo (MM): 2, Now I'm seeing why you want this to be an archetype, but I still see a disconnect between the flavor as advertised and the real flavor of the archetype. What Churches deem as “the wicked” does not correspond with alignment at all, so the repenan strike does not work as intended.
Mechanical Execution (ME): 1. Many problems. Giving a 4th level spell as an added effect to all targets of a spell you cast, Monster knowledge checks, giving all your allies your main class ability. ...
Final note: The Preacher/ Missionary/ cleanser of the wicked could have been a cool concept for an Inquisitor archetype ( with focus on the first 2 parts, or they are what sets this apart from the baseline), but this doesn't deliver in any category.
Total Score: 3
As your competition I'm loathe to say too much, but...
If I had to give a full review of your entry, I would simply steal just about everything that Eric Baily said and put my name on it. Not to dis other comments, but his is the most like the way I felt (and it was very constructive too).
On a side note:
...I can't be a fair judge of this or any Inquisitor class archetype right now...
What I refreshingly honest statement.
+1 for using the Inquisitor. There are enough base class archetypes!
Nice name K Patrick, it is strong, decisive, and evocative. I wanted more from it of course, but you started two points ahead in my book. the other from going with inquisitor. Archetypes are new, and inquisitors are new so you took a really big bite and I that is a SS move.
I like the idea of a teamwork friendly inquisitor. Both the inquisitor and the alchemist in APG were very selfish classes, and being able to share a bit sounds good in practice. In addition, one of my favorite 3.5 classes was the archivist, who gave his allies bonuses by making Knowledge checks. But this seems just too good. The quantify the sins ability has the same problems as the lunar druid's rage-powered animals did; it's bringing in allies that are just like a class (in this case, the inquisitor), but better. After all, they've already got all of their own class abilities on top of the judgment bonuses. I think it was a smart idea to trade out bane for something else, but to include such a high level spell effect as a rider on melee attacks and, later, area of effect spells, seems like getting way too much for too little.
Although the flavor of a social and helpful inquisitor is a good idea, as written this archetype is too powerful for me to vote for.
Denouncer(Inquisitor)
Every faith decries the sins of the wicked, sending missionaries to other lands to preach the faith. Missionaries are often protectors and agents sent to facilitate conversion and root out heresy . A Denouncer preaches of the wickedness of the enemy and reveals their weaknesses. With the aid of allies and divine magic, the Denouncer calls down judgment upon them.
You should know the drill by now, but in case you missed it the first time round, Ask A RPGSupersuccubus is posting from the point of view of a CE aligned succubus:
Would you want this person sitting next to you as a guest at a formal evening dress dinner party?
Well, that depends partially on the deity whom she serves, and partially on whether she's in a party mood or if she's instead going to sit there glowering and muttering into her soup about falling standards these days... Being lectured about failings is rather trying on the patience. Especially sitting through thirteen courses of it.
How effective a flower-picker does this person seem likely to be?
Whilst undoubtedly knowledgeable on a broad variety of subjects, a denouncer strikes me as being a 'get minions to do any hard work for me' type of person, giving directions from a safe distance. Whilst in and of itself that's not a problem, coming from a denouncer it's not exactly romantic.
Could you hire one person like this to do a better job than one other trained mercenary and/or to do the jobs of two (or more) other trained mercenaries?
On balance probably no. I'm not terribly interested in promulgating religions of any sort and - if you set the religious fanaticism (with sin confession) angle aside - I could probably retain a bard to do a good deal of the 'bolstering allies and sowing despair amongst enemies' work which a denouncer does. Plus a bard might actually write a poem in praise of my great beauty, or dedicate an ode to me, which it's genuinely horrible to imagine a denouncer attempting to do.
About all you can say for a denouncer is that if you feign any kind of religious fervour, you might get her at a cheap rate in fiscal terms - but the accompanying price in terms of long-winded lectures and sermons is likely to be quite steep.
Other comments?
Fortunately for succubi our complete lack of moral qualms at least spares us any need to start grovelling once a denouncer starts blasting out the calls to announce and repent of sins. Where a denouncer is so confident of herself that she relies on this as her sole means of determining moral fibre a wily succubus can of course play this to her advantage: 'I'm not down on my knees grovelling, so I must be blameless in the eyes of your deity, right?'
I would advise a succubus not to overplay this angle though, since at some point that may lead the denouncer to develop suspicions of a magical amulet or talisman protecting the succubus, which will in turn result in a strip search. And an intensely jealous (or lustful) denouncer will only cause much more trouble down the road...
Desirability:
Hireable but very, very, expendable. Snack if she won't shut up about the religious stuff.
Had to call-out a little defense of my spell - it doesn't allow a second save, which is an edge over hideous laughter, and because of that 2nd save, hideous laughter's usually a bad choice of spell to use against creatures not of your type. It's not the world's strongest 4th level spell, but then hideous laughter's an extremely effective 2nd level spell that a single class gets at 1st. In general, it seemed in keeping with the inquisitor's existing offensive spells when I designed it, which is always a factor in design. Not saying it's spell perfection, but spell balance does involve considering the class you're giving it to.
No, but your spell ends if the target is attacked or you leave the target's line of sight-- which hideous laughter doesn't do-- and makes hideous laughter a better spell. Someone hits a party member with this and I'll spare a magic missile, an arrow, or a shuriken to get them back up and running, the equivalent of a long-range slap. I could send my familiar over there to bite them, or maliciously drop something on them. Maybe I'll just put you in a solid fog or fog cloud (2nd!) or behind a wall for battlefield control. Bang, effect done, and it may not have cost me a thing.
Not only that, but the 12th level ability can be used about 3 times a day, on a handful of spells as he has it worded-- since it requires the spell to have targets, rather than an AOE, of which only halt undead (3rd), mass castigate (5th), and ghostbane dirge (5th) really qualify to make this a "mass" option (possibly enthrall, but I find that an appropriate image). Otherwise, you're getting a way to add a rider spell to a single target ranged spell-- one that's roughly equivalent to a second-level effect. The chaos hammer/flame strike/holy smite/order's wrath spells don't qualify-- because they don't have targets. They have an AOE.
-Ben.
Neil has pointed out the formatting errors in this. The problem is that you need to learn and grow in this competition and do it quickly. It’s worth checking the other contestant’s entries because a judge may point out something there that is also valid for your entry.
Is this a valid archetype for an inquisitor? I wasn’t sure at the start, but I’ve come to believe that it is valid. The idea being more about verbally judging the ‘wicked’ and turning the rest of the party into an angry mob than being a loner/solo vigilante.
Giving away your judgment class ability to the other PCs is innovative, but needs to be tighter. You also have to watch each judgment (especially the fast healing one) here to make sure they aren’t too powerful in a mass version. Limiting the judgment types might have made sense. As others have said this should be a higher level ability so that you can have a better version of the judgment and give the other PCs a less powerful version.
The Inquisitor class is tricky to know the balance for because it has lots of abilities and it is different to many other classes in what role it performs. I don’t think you have done too badly in creating abilities, they may be overpowered but they are innovative. They change the focus of the class but still stayed within what the class is meant to do.
Good luck in the voting.
|
RPG Superstar 2013
,
Dedicated Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9
aka Steven T. Helt
|
There are stylistic problems with this archetype. But overpowered abilities in Repentant Strike and Compel the Faithful? Not really.
I am not sure I agree, Heidi. The bard is not the combat powerhouse that the inquisitor can be. Both can be good support characters, or fair fighting characters, but the inquisitor can be significantly more meaty and boss. Giving the bard hideous laughter at first level is a balancing factor, giving them something they can do to low-level enemies. The inquisitor can already beat down low-level enemies AND his ability gets more powerful, while hideous laughter becomes useless quickly.
I think this class frontloads too much power, and isn't really clever. Thematically, the judgmental inquisitor archetype gets changed to...a judgmental inquisitor. Only the mechanics change, and not enough to jsutify a new archetype. Moreover, the changes are really based on one ability that all other inquisitors get later. In addition to having balance issues, it's just not exciting or clever.
And then there's the styles issues. I feel we are sometimes told "have an awesome core concept", and then told "Superstars don't have to choose - you can get it all right" and then told "You have to submit an entry as if it's a proferssional audition for work. An unprofessional entry isn't superstar". Balancing these facotrs can be a little subjective, and can be tricky when evaluating so many entries, but I think this one is a case where the author doesn't even proofread the entry or evaulate the styles of Paizo and Pathfinder terminology. It's egregious enough to cost my vote even if there weren't other, huge issues with the class.
I think this class frontloads too much power, and isn't really clever. Thematically, the judgmental inquisitor archetype gets changed to...a judgmental inquisitor. Only the mechanics change, and not enough to jsutify a new archetype. Moreover, the changes are really based on one ability that all other inquisitors get later. In addition to having balance issues, it's just not exciting or clever.
And then there's the styles issues. I feel we are sometimes told "have an awesome core concept", and then told "Superstars don't have to choose - you can get it all right" and then told "You have to submit an entry as if it's a proferssional audition for work. An unprofessional entry isn't superstar". Balancing these facotrs can be a little subjective, and can be tricky when evaluating so many entries, but I think this one is a case where the author doesn't even proofread the entry or evaulate the styles of Paizo and Pathfinder terminology. It's egregious enough to cost my vote even if there weren't other, huge issues with the class.
I've never actually played an inquisitor, but I've seen some through the course of playing and they've been decent but didn't seem incredibly powerful. When looking at the spells that the Inquisitor gets in order to make a valid decision on the archetypes round, I really liked the forced repentance spell and thought it could be the definitive spell of the class. Seems to me that Inquisitors in general are people who force confessions from supposed heretics and here's a spell that did just that. Except, it was a fourth level spell. No wonder I'd never seen it played - despite the defense from Russ Taylor, it is one of the weakest 4th level spells I've ever seen. I would never take it and I've never seen someone who has. It's extremely limited in application and just about anything can stop it from working. And yet, it's the most flavorful spell that an Inquisitor can use. It's the best RP spell in the book.
Truthfully, some of the criticisms I just don't get. I thought Monster Knowledge Check was pretty standard wording for when you make a knowledge check ... on a monster. But maybe that's just in my circles, I don't know. Maybe I don't know enough about correct terminology to be a good contributor to the competition.
But at least I know enough to know that the judges may be giving voters incorrect information, probably though misunderstanding, that may be making this submission seem more overpowered than it is.
At 5th level, the Denouncer is going to have 5 shots at inflicting forced repentance on the toughest opponent each day.
But from my understanding, at 5th level, the Inquisitor would be half his class level (therefore TWO) shots at inflicting forced repentance on the toughest opponent each day. And that's IF the toughest opponent is evil and IF he doesn't have the evil subtype and IF he can be affected by mind-affecting and it breaks if the next person to go hits the toughest opponent or if the Inquisitor loses line of sight (which could be accomplished by a freaking smokestick but also by invis, blindness, unconcious, etc.).
I really just don't see the frontloading of the power. I see it as fixing an awesome spell. Guess that's not Superstar, though.
This seems like a "splitting hairs" archetype, in that it strikes very, very close to its base class thematically. I suspect that we'll see more that are similarly close to their base as the archetype concept is further explored. But things are fairly open now. I wish you had gone further afield.
Not only that, but the 12th level ability can be used about 3 times a day, on a handful of spells as he has it worded-- since it requires the spell to have targets, rather than an AOE, of which only halt undead (3rd), mass castigate (5th), and ghostbane dirge (5th) really qualify to make this a "mass" option (possibly enthrall, but I find that an appropriate image). Otherwise, you're getting a way to add a rider spell to a single target ranged spell-- one that's roughly equivalent to a second-level effect. The chaos hammer/flame strike/holy smite/order's wrath spells don't qualify-- because they don't have targets. They have an AOE.
-Ben.
That's riiiight, there's no reprint of Chain Spell in Pathfinder... and all the cool multi-Target spells are Not Inquisitor Spells, so you've pretty much figured out a way to make a terrible spell get a second look. It's like this archetype takes some waste of page space from another book and makes it actually worth that space it takes up. NICE.
That's a pretty cool ability, and a sweet flavorful capstone, and it means a Denouncer is not forced to go melee to use its class features.
Awesome.
-Matt
Denouncer(Inquisitor)
Conceptually, this seems like a good idea. I think there is a place for a Denouncer in the game. However, the execution unfortunately falls short of both game balance (as pointed out) and the concept.
I simply think you could have created more unique abilities focused on the concept of Denouncing sin. Forced Repentence seems so specific and I don't think it fits the concept as well as you think. A denouncer doesn't strike me as someone trying to convert people to the faith. He seems instead to simply be striking down the sinners, until those he hasn't gotten to yet repent before he does.
Just my thoughts.
Ken
I really love the thought out choice for class list and some of the abilities. However I have to fall down on the side of the judges. What does it for me is the very last line. The strict adherence to the faith bugs me since it limits their abilities in the wrong way in my opinion.
I would not want to play this class.
Obligatory End of Round 2 Results Post:
Consequently a multitude of books of etiquette are in circulation with examples of ‘appropriate’ phrases to use in various situations. I shall take the liberty of quoting a few:
…Greetings, your most puissant highness…
…Why sirrah, it is a pleasure to meet you. May one inquire, is that an enchanted cold-iron dagger of demon-slaying in your pocket, or are you just pleased to see me?...
…Goodbye Mr. Bond…