|
Okay, so my next question is: how do you build your Inquisitor?
My inquisitor is a virtuous devote of Shalyn. He is devoted to the concept of true love. He seeks out those who would tarnish the ideal of love (abusive spouses, rapists, pimps) and extracts confessions before the authorities. In his off time he works with a theatre company as a minor actor.
Mechanicly he empheaises strength and then wisdom. Inteletence is low stat. He will attempt to avoid combat through use of intimidation, but if pushed will subdue an opponent rather than kill him using the Stage Combatant and Merciful Bane feets from UC and simply taking the penalties to deal non-lethal damage before that. He would also take the Preacher archetype from UM because I'm not a big fan of teamwork feets.
The thing is that a inqusitor who works fo a different church will play and be built very differently and neither will be wrong.
Okay, so my next question is: how do you build your Inquisitor?My inquisitor is a virtuous devote of Shalyn. He is devoted to the concept of true love. He seeks out those who would tarnish the ideal of love (abusive spouses, rapists, pimps) and extracts confessions before the authorities. In his off time he works with a theatre company as a minor actor.
Mechanicly he empheaises strength and then wisdom. Inteletence is low stat. He will attempt to avoid combat through use of intimidation, but if pushed will subdue an opponent rather than kill him using the Stage Combatant and Merciful Bane feets from UC and simply taking the penalties to deal non-lethal damage before that. He would also take the Preacher archetype from UM because I'm not a big fan of teamwork feets.
The thing is that a inqusitor who works fo a different church will play and be built very differently and neither will be wrong.
Hah, I'm planning on playing an iquisitor of shelyn too! Except I'm gonna take the sin eater archtype, basically he/she is gonna hunt down art offenders/ art stealers and make them pay BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY! ermmm. sorry got a bit in to character there... to enable the eat sin archetype feature, I was planning on making a piece of art out of the victim or making art on the body using the brand orison XD.
I keep coming back to Giles Redfern from Warlock - am I the only one who's seen this movie?
Heck, no, you're not. :-)
My inquisitor is a half-orc bow-shooter who follows Desna. It just fit my vision of the PC -- a self-sufficient type who is out to fulfill the freedom and travel teachings of the faith.
One of the guys with whom I've played in PFS has a human melee inquisitor. We always laugh that "no one expects the Chelaxian Inquisition," to which the halfling at the table disagrees strongly, since he expects it all the time. :-)
My Inquisitor will be very religious-minded. He's actually a follower of Aroden, and seeking to bring the human race back into the fold of the god of humanity. His alignment is chaotic good, though I'll be playing as lawful according to the divine laws of Aroden. He's a talk first, fight second kind of guy, but when the sword leaves its sheath the talking is through.
I haven't built him to be the monster hunter at all. He's more of the kind that solves crimes through the act of picking through others' lies. Naturally, sense motive is my skill of choice.
In answer to your other question about build, I've built my character around his Wisdom score at the cost of his Charisma, though the Conversion Inquisition helps a great deal to mask that flaw by allowing him to use the Wisdom score for bluff, diplomacy, and intimidate checks.
Sort of a Medieval Judge Dredd.
Think of the scene with Max Von Sydow as Chief Judge Fargo as he's about to take the long walk into Cursed Earth, bringing law to the lawless, etc.
Now just change the serving the Law part to whatever deity the Inquisitor serves.
Cleric/Batman multiclass works too.
If you ever played Planescape... A Paladin/Cleric Mercykiller.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The role of the Inquisitor is like the role of any other class. It isn't dependent on the class's crunchy bits, rules, abilities or powers. It depends on the *Player.* What sort of Inquisitor does the Player *want* to play?
An Inquisitor can be:
A monster hunter like Van Helsing;
A monster hunter who is *nothing* like Van Helsing;
An intolerant Ass who has a really narrow definition of how to worship his deity and thinks he's doing his deity's bidding (rightly so?) by hunting down alleged "heretics";
A masked crime fighter who uses the power of her deity to right wrongs and stand up for those who cannot defend themselves (could Blackjack from Korvosa be an Inquisitor? If the DM says so, then yeah);
A covert agent--one among many--hired and trained by the church to carry out missions that are too "gray area" or too politically risky for the Church to pursue through more conventional channels--even Good Aligned churches might occasionally need something taken care of "discreetly";
I'm sure I could go on, but there's the notion. A character's "role" is limited only by the imagination of his or her player...
They're divine monster hunters.
They are based roughly off of Abraham van Helsing, from the Dracula novel.
They do great as archers, due to the self-buffs they get, and Bane. The sheer number of arrows they can shoot means the damage adds up fast with archery.
So what do you mean by the number of arrows? I see that they're proficient with repeating crossbows; don't you still need the rapid shot feat to fire more than one in a round?
you don`t need rapid shot, anybody proficient (or non-proficient - you just have a penalty) can full attack with a repeating x-bow.
rapid shot just gives you an EXTRA ATTACK on top of the full attack.
if it wasn`t clear, he`s saying archery is nice because you can full attack consistently and stuff like rapid shot exists to pump out more attacks. more attacks are even greater when you have alot of per-attack damage bonuses, like inquisitor bane. you can also get more attacks in melee by using 2WF or natural attacks in addition to your weapons. I believe some of the Teamwork Feats (Solo Tactics) grant extra AoO options as well.
|
you don`t need rapid shot, anybody proficient (or non-proficient - you just have a penalty) can full attack with a repeating x-bow.
rapid shot just gives you an EXTRA ATTACK on top of the full attack.
if it wasn`t clear, he`s saying archery is nice because you can full attack consistently and stuff like rapid shot exists to pump out more attacks. more attacks are even greater when you have alot of per-attack damage bonuses, like inquisitor bane. you can also get more attacks in melee by using 2WF or natural attacks in addition to your weapons.
Or using two-weapon fighting and a repeating crossbow with an extended magazine, because you are going to need it eventually.
Or using two-weapon fighting and a repeating crossbow with an extended magazine, because you are going to need it eventually.you don`t need rapid shot, anybody proficient (or non-proficient - you just have a penalty) can full attack with a repeating x-bow.
rapid shot just gives you an EXTRA ATTACK on top of the full attack.
if it wasn`t clear, he`s saying archery is nice because you can full attack consistently and stuff like rapid shot exists to pump out more attacks. more attacks are even greater when you have alot of per-attack damage bonuses, like inquisitor bane. you can also get more attacks in melee by using 2WF or natural attacks in addition to your weapons.
Ok, now I'm really confused. You can only get extra attacks with the same weapon if it's a DOUBLE weapon, yes? So how are you using TWF to get an extra attack with the repeater (not a double weapon)?
|
|
I think what he is saying is that rapid shot and TWF (works for two different weapons and double weapons) are the ways to start getting extra attacks from level 1. They both allow you an extra hit while most others will be capped at 1 until 5th level at least. They are not saying to use twf with the crossbow.
No, I'm saying use twf with a repeating crossbow, since you can use it in one hand, while using rapid shot, you won't hit very often unless your stats are awesome, or you roll really well.
You won't even be able to do it until level 3 anyway, even if you are a human, -4 for rapid shot and twf, +2 bab, at leas a +2 from dex, +1 from point blank shot (assuming you are in 30 feet) because of the requirements, just make sure you are attacking something with a lousy AC.
Besides no one can beat the ninja in terms of attacks made, if he has flurry of stars and rapid shot.
I think what he is saying is that rapid shot and TWF (works for two different weapons and double weapons) are the ways to start getting extra attacks from level 1. They both allow you an extra hit while most others will be capped at 1 until 5th level at least. They are not saying to use twf with the crossbow.No, I'm saying use twf with a repeating crossbow, since you can use it in one hand, while using rapid shot, you won't hit very often unless your stats are awesome, or you roll really well.
You won't even be able to do it until level 3 anyway, even if you are a human, -4 for rapid shot and twf, +2 bab, at leas a +2 from dex, +1 from point blank shot (assuming you are in 30 feet) because of the requirements, just make sure you are attacking something with a lousy AC.
Besides no one can beat the ninja in terms of attacks made, if he has flurry of stars and rapid shot.
But... why would I use a repeating crossbow with another weapon? You need two hands to reload the crossbow, yes? So if there's a weapon in your other hand, it might as well be any kind of crossbow. So, like, two repeating crossbows aren't much good because you need two hands to reload either of them. And if your other hand is a melee weapon, you're either in AoO range while using the crossbow or out of melee range, thus rendering half of your two weapons useless. I guess you could throw a dagger with your off hand, but that doesn't seem like a good return on your 1 feat and -2 attack bonus investment.
So how does TWF improve the repeating crossbow?
|
|
@Joeyfixit:No, I was going for sheer style, twf with repeating crossbows (you would be using two in this hypothetical situation) is really bad, especially in the low levels when you need every bonus to hit. You would have 10 shots before you needed to reload, so hopefully your enemies don't last longer than 3 turns, and if they did you'd have to switch to melee weapons.
But, think about it: You could jump in slow motion firing shots just as poorly as one would expect someone who is jumping through mid air to shoot, it would be cool, poorly built, but cool. TWF doesn't work most of the time anyway, unless your opponent has a terrible AC, or you have so many bonuses you basically hit on 2s anyway.
I pretty much only use TWF when I'm running a paladin, fighter, or a ninja, and even then only when the paladin is smiting, or when the ninja is invisible. The fighter has a flat bonus to hit based on your weapon (whichever one you selected for your weapon training) and I've always found that the fighter hits pretty much all the time, so selling off my hit for extra damage is something I do a lot when running one.
The paladin gets huge bonuses when smiting, plus whatever spells he's decided to run, so two-weapon fighting is okay, but he's still feat-starved, so it's by no means perfect.
Rapid shot is oddly okay, mostly because archery already tends to have a really good bonus to hit.
@Joeyfixit:No, I was going for sheer style, twf with repeating crossbows (you would be using two in this hypothetical situation) is really bad, especially in the low levels when you need every bonus to hit. You would have 10 shots before you needed to reload, so hopefully your enemies don't last longer than 3 turns, and if they did you'd have to switch to melee weapons.
Huh? Ten shots? You need to USE TWO HANDS to reload it:
"However, you must fire the weapon with two hands in order to use the reloading lever..."
Which means that after round one you need to drop one of them and use both of your hands to reload the other. You sunk a feat and the hefty pricetag of two repeaters into getting one extra attack for one round. Meaning the second repeater might as well have been a non-repeating crossbow. Seriously, what am I missing?
Rapid shot is okay, but doesn't seem worth it at low levels. I'll be rolling this guy up at level 3, so Spell Focus: Enchantment and GSF: Enchant will probably eat up two feats so that I can get the most out of Bane and Forbid Action.
|
|
@Joeyfixit:I'm going to make this as clear as I possibly can YOU ARE USING TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING WITH 2 REPEATING CROSSBOWS IN THIS BUILD even if it's not very good. Like I said, this build isn't very good, but it's fun to imagine. Each repeating crossbow has 5 bolts, 2x5=10, 10/3= 3.33 repeating, meaning you would get 3 rounds of firing before having to reload, and you might as well just drop them and switch weapons at that point.
|
My first Inquisitor was of Cayden Cailean. Mostly a ranged focus but switched to two weapon fighting when the party got flanked. he ended up being a better tank due to buffs and judgements than the partty barbarian. Though he was just fun to play. Over all he was a nice guy, but had no qualms with doing mean things to protect the good and innocent.
My second Inquisitor was a bit more versitile than expected. We rolled stats, and that was my main reason to attempt the build. A War Domain Inquisitor, but he didn't have any feats that worked with each other, till he hit level 8. Suddenly, Power Attack, Two Weapon Fighting, Combat Expertise, Improved Unarmed Strike, and Point Blank all made sense. I used the war domain's power to essentually have access to most combat feat trees and combat manuevers. Our party fighter got mad though, because my Inquisitor could adapt to situations quicker because of the ability to swap a teamwork feat and activate a better feat for the situation. True it was only for so many rounds, but it allowed for for my party to get through some stick situations...at the cost of my divine juju. Play wise I loved that Inquisitor. It was like being a fighter with more tricks, and I did a lot for my party. Flavor wise, I was traveling with the group to continue honing my skills in battle proving the Might of Gorum's Band was superior.
The inquisitor I'm working on now is of either Iomadae or Sarenae... and I'm playing around with feats to maybe end up as a holy vindicator without dipping into another class. It's not optimal Though it should be fun...for S&G take a look
Class: Inquisitor
Domain: War, Travel, Sun, Glory, or Strength
Ideal Diety: Gorum, Iomadae, Pharasma, or Desna
Traits: Magical Knack (Inquisitor), Armored Expert, Reactionary, Veteran of Battle, Wisdom of Flesh, Blade of Mercy, Flame of the Dawnflower, or Divine Warrior
Feats:
1: Skill Focus (any Knowledge)
HB: Improved Initiative (if War domain: Improved Unarmed Strike, Point Blank Shot, Two Weapon Fighting, Combat Expertise,
3: Eldritch Heritage (Arcane: Summon Familiar)
5: Adept Channel
7: Alignment Channel or Elemental Channel
9: Two Weapon fighting, Shield Focus, or Improved Shield Bash (if War domain: Power Attack or one of the others not selected from above. Precise Shot and Rapid Shot are also good investments.)
11: Improved Familiar, Combat Reflexes, Versitile Chanelling, or Extra Channeling, and Missile Shield are all good choices.
You could switch to Holy Vindicator at 8th level, However I prefer to ride Inquisitor out to 11, especially with the War domain, which when used right allows the PC access to most feats that they'd need. Granted it's for 11 rounds, but still very useful depending on your style. Just remember, the Inquisitor can still switch out one of his/her Teamwork feats several times a day. The war domain really allows the inquistito/Holyvindicator to be a great switch hitter. The extra spells and verisitle spell list gives the paladin a run for his/her money as a holy warrior. If you want Greater Bane, you can stick out Inqusitor to 12, which is a worthy way of building up damage.
Like itwas said before, Inquisitors are versitile and easy to build in a fun environment. They also give you a lot of flexibility to play how you want.
You don't have to hunt monsters, be a spy, or crusade....but you can if you like. The way I look at it... in the toy box of RPGs the Inquisitor sits with the Bard, Ranger, and Alchemist and says, "what do you want to play today?"
Note that gravefillers build isn't strictly RAW.
@Joeyfixit:I'm going to make this as clear as I possibly can YOU ARE USING TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING WITH 2 REPEATING CROSSBOWS IN THIS BUILD even if it's not very good. Like I said, this build isn't very good, but it's fun to imagine. Each repeating crossbow has 5 bolts, 2x5=10, 10/3= 3.33 repeating, meaning you would get 3 rounds of firing before having to reload, and you might as well just drop them and switch weapons at that point.
But you'd only get one extra attack with that, because you must shoot a repeating crossbow with two hands to use the reloading lever.
But you'd only get one extra attack with that, because you must shoot a repeating crossbow with two hands to use the reloading lever.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/cross bow-repeating
Actually nothin' says you must use a hand, so use your teeth.Or be a lv 2 Alchemist for a third hand.
Great, now I have this terrifying vision of a gestalt alchemist/inquisitor with 2 extra vestigial limbs and 2 extra tenticles waving around 4-5 repeating crossbows and having random limbs reload them all.
Okay, bottom line.
Inquisitors can cause great damage when they can attack many times in a single round. This is because the bane ability can add damage to every hit.
There are many ways to get a character to have more attacks in a full attack than BAB alone would provide
Method 1: Archery/Ranged Attacks, In addition to using feats like rapid shot or multishot to add attacks, a ranged combatant will be able to full attack often, as they have little need to move into position. Rather than having to close to melee range, they can usually attack from wherever they already are.
Method 2: TWF/Double weapons, This used the TWF feat chain to get more melee attacks.
Method 3 Natural Attacks, This method uses natural attacks in addition to a melee weapon. Note: You cannot use a natural attack and a weapon in the same hand.
Some of the posters above have posted theoretical strategies that combine one or more of these methods. They may or may not be rules legal.
But you'd only get one extra attack with that, because you must shoot a repeating crossbow with two hands to use the reloading lever.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/cross bow-repeating
Actually nothin' says you must use a hand, so use your teeth.
"Note: The repeating crossbow (whether heavy or light) holds 5 crossbow bolts. You can fire a repeating crossbow with one hand or fire a repeating crossbow in each hand in the same manner as you would a normal crossbow of the same size. However, you must fire the weapon with TWO HANDS in order to use the reloading lever, and you must use two hands to load a new case of bolts."
@Joeyfixit:I'm going to make this as clear as I possibly can YOU ARE USING TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING WITH 2 REPEATING CROSSBOWS IN THIS BUILD even if it's not very good. Like I said, this build isn't very good, but it's fun to imagine. Each repeating crossbow has 5 bolts, 2x5=10, 10/3= 3.33 repeating, meaning you would get 3 rounds of firing before having to reload, and you might as well just drop them and switch weapons at that point.
Not trying to antagonize you, dude, but that explanation is as clear as mud.
I'm holding two repeating crossbows. Each has 5 bolts. That's ten bolts total, granted. I fire each of them, once, in the first round.
Now it's the second round. Both crossbows require a free action to reload, but that free action nevertheless requires two hands. Each of my two hands has one crossbow in it. How do I fire them both again without operating the reload lever?
Where did the number 3 come from?
My next question is: does the Inquisitor proficient in heavy repeating crossbows? If not, who is?
|
|
My next question is: does the Inquisitor proficient in heavy repeating crossbows? If not, who is?
reapeating crossbows come in two flavors, light and heavy.
RAW states: Weapon and Armor Proficiency: An inquisitor is proficient with all simple weapons, plus the hand crossbow, longbow, repeating crossbow, shortbow, and the favored weapon of her deity. She is also proficient with light armor, medium armor, and shields (except tower shields).
So, I would infer that lack of specification of repeating crossbow is refering to heavy and light repeating crossbows are both included in Inquisitor proficiency.
I am playing a Half-Giant Inquisitor of Pharasma in a home game that is currently on hiatus. Personally I love the flavor of the Inquisitor class and find it to be just the right blend of balance that makes it fun and versatile. My half-giant takes advantage of Powerful build to wield a Large size Earthbreaker (that I took proficiency with). With bane he does 2d8 and 2d6 +bonuses per hit witha x3 crit. It's rediculous, and he's only like level 4.
people are silly. read my last post. i mentioned 2WF and Natural Attacks as ways to get extra attacks IN MELEE, which repeating cross-bows are definitely NOT melee. in other words, i was mentioning 2WF as a melee EQUIVALENT to ranged rapid fire, NOT talking about combining them. you CAN do so to some extent, but that´s not what I was talking about. I´m not sure how much more clear I could have been than writing ´MELEE´ like I did in the original post.
-------------
i like gravefiller´s usage of the war domain with inquisitor... i´ve never really used war domain, but it seems like especially with inquisitor it´s a great match.
|
|
people are silly. read my last post. i mentioned 2WF and Natural Attacks as ways to get extra attacks IN MELEE, which repeating cross-bows are definitely NOT melee. in other words, i was mentioning 2WF as a melee EQUIVALENT to ranged rapid fire, NOT talking about combining them. you CAN do so to some extent, but that´s not what I was talking about. I´m not sure how much more clear I could have been than writing ´MELEE´ like I did in the original post.
-------------
i like gravefiller´s usage of the war domain with inquisitor... i´ve never really used war domain, but it seems like especially with inquisitor it´s a great match.
I always avoided it with clerics, because it just didn't seem to get the milage it should have. However, I dare say I like using it more than the Travel and Liberation Domains. The only issue with the War Domain though, and my strategy is waiting till level 8 for all your feats to come together. Until then you relly need to rely on judgements and play smart. However that moment of "wait, how'd you do that", you get from your party is worth the slightly sub optimal play till that point. There's nothign that says you have to spread out as much as I do either. That build is just divinely assisted combat versitility. We had a had some very interesting needs in our later combats.
Inquisitors get a great deal of options to NOVA with. "Divine Batman" is likely the only way I can think of them now. I'm borrowing that if you couldn't tell.
|
|
@Joeyfixit:I'm going to make this as clear as I possibly can YOU ARE USING TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING WITH 2 REPEATING CROSSBOWS IN THIS BUILD even if it's not very good. Like I said, this build isn't very good, but it's fun to imagine. Each repeating crossbow has 5 bolts, 2x5=10, 10/3= 3.33 repeating, meaning you would get 3 rounds of firing before having to reload, and you might as well just drop them and switch weapons at that point.Not trying to antagonize you, dude, but that explanation is as clear as mud.
I'm holding two repeating crossbows. Each has 5 bolts. That's ten bolts total, granted. I fire each of them, once, in the first round.
Now it's the second round. Both crossbows require a free action to reload, but that free action nevertheless requires two hands. Each of my two hands has one crossbow in it. How do I fire them both again without operating the reload lever?
Where did the number 3 come from?
Two-weapon fighting, rapid shot. Also, you can drop one as a free action, and reload the one you still have. If you have them on weapon cords, you can pick it up as a swift action, allowing you to fire all 3 shots.
Two-weapon fighting, rapid shot. Also, you can drop one as a free action, and reload the one you still have. If you have them on weapon cords, you can pick it up as a swift action, allowing you to fire all 3 shots.@Joeyfixit:I'm going to make this as clear as I possibly can YOU ARE USING TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING WITH 2 REPEATING CROSSBOWS IN THIS BUILD even if it's not very good. Like I said, this build isn't very good, but it's fun to imagine. Each repeating crossbow has 5 bolts, 2x5=10, 10/3= 3.33 repeating, meaning you would get 3 rounds of firing before having to reload, and you might as well just drop them and switch weapons at that point.Not trying to antagonize you, dude, but that explanation is as clear as mud.
I'm holding two repeating crossbows. Each has 5 bolts. That's ten bolts total, granted. I fire each of them, once, in the first round.
Now it's the second round. Both crossbows require a free action to reload, but that free action nevertheless requires two hands. Each of my two hands has one crossbow in it. How do I fire them both again without operating the reload lever?
Where did the number 3 come from?
I'm positive my DM wouldn't let me get away with this, on the grounds that I was gaming the system. Probably he would rule that picking up a dropped weapon is a move action, even if it was tied. Especially if it was a heavy repeater. And I might as well use a longbow if im going to take a -4 to attack rolls for d8 of damage.
And anyway, if I was going to sink ALL feats into artillery, I'd play a ranger.
But thanks for the input.
... and as I'm thinking about it, I'm still not convinced this gives you three shots per round, consistently. Let me talk it out.
Round the First: I'm holding two crossbows. I fire both, at a -4 penalty. I drop the one in my left hand. As a free action I reload the right one, using two hands to do it. (pretty sure this itself is in violation of TWF, since that offhand was used to fire a weapon already). I fire it, and as a free action I reload it again. Now I use a swift action to pick up my empty crossbow.
Round the Second: I'm holding two crossbows, only one of which is loaded. I fire the right one, which is loaded, and then I drop it as a free action. As a free action I use my right hand to reload the left, empty one (again, almost certainly a violation of TWF, since you're using two hands to reload, and that other hand has already fired a weapon). I fire it, and as a free action I reload it and fire again (something I CAN'T do with TWF by itself, but could do with Rapid Shot). I reload it and now I use my swift action to pick up my other crossbow. I'm now holding one loaded and one unloaded. Each has been fired three times and each has two shots left...
This really doesn't add up. This is actually way more work than holding one crossbow and firing it over and over again, which TWF does not allow. I have trouble believing that ANY DM would allow this, and I don't thinks it's RAI or RAW. With both TWF and Rapid, I'm willing to concede that you MIGHT get one round with three shots, but even that seems like a stretch.
i cant wrap my head around why anyone would play an inquisitor over a cleric. i mean a cleric with the knowledge domain can put out just as much damage as this guy can, and he gets a better spell list. is it just a coolness factor about playing van helsing?
I don't think that anyone argues the power of the cleric even in PF but the inquisitor can also become quite powerful, in addition we can't have every new class compared in power to the cleric (or the widely accepted powerful classes) some classes just aren't in the same power level, sure PF has tried to close the gaps and IMO it has succeded in making the gaps smaller but there are still here.
|
|
I'm positive my DM wouldn't let me get away with this, on the grounds that I was gaming the system. Probably he would rule that picking up a dropped weapon is a move action, even if it was tied. Especially if it was a heavy repeater. And I might as well use a longbow if im going to take a -4 to attack rolls for d8 of damage.
And anyway, if I was going to sink ALL feats into artillery, I'd play a ranger.
But thanks for the input.
That's perfectly legal, if the rules weren't intended to be used in this way, then they wouldn't have wrote them as such, besides it's not really gaming the system, it's making full use of the action economy, simply so you can pretend your character is always leaping through the air in slow motion, while firing two crossbows.
Probably while wearing sunglasses and a trench coat.
|
|
i cant wrap my head around why anyone would play an inquisitor over a cleric. i mean a cleric with the knowledge domain can put out just as much damage as this guy can, and he gets a better spell list. is it just a coolness factor about playing van helsing?
Call me ignorant, but how does the knowledge domain bosst damage so much?
|
|
It doesn't.
Inquisitors don't necessarily need to know every strength or weakness of a monster, they just need to know what type of monster it is. So they can bane it to death.
Bane is why you'd play an inquisitor over a cleric. You'd think that 2d6+2 isn't a lot of extra damage, but when you're using rapidshot/manyshot, it adds up really quickly.
On top of that, the inquisitor has a nice spell list, so if you build your inquisitor for combat, you'd likely have Divine Favor up at the start of every battle, while maintaining Destruction judgement and using a compound bow at whatever your strength score is... the damage adds up rediculously quickly.
Throw in teamwork feats, my favorite is Escape Route from UC (get to move through allies threatened squares without provoking), and you have an entirely different beast than a cleric.
Which was why I was trying to figure out the post about a clericwith the knowledge domain out damaging an Inquisitor.
The inquisitor has so many sources of bonus's to hit. They really only need a moment or two to become custome murder to whatever the party faces. Teamworks feats in UC got really mean for the inquisitor. too many ways to get attacks of opportunity and the new spells are very effective. Combo Share Judgement with Judgement Light.
The Inquisitor can just be a beast.
When I first read the inquisitor, Soloman Kane was the image that came to me immeadiately.
I have made one for Carrion Crown (haven't gotten to play yet :( prolly in new year) Mostly chose the class for versatility. (and kick arse intimidation!!!!)
Nice level of skills. Nice spell list. Lovely judgements. Teamwork bonus feats (mostly icing but nice) Great monster lore. ( I like knowing what bypasses DR or weaknesses)
is a very well done guide with lots of help for designing an Inquisitor. I cherry picked for mine (made some substandard choices but better for rp with party/DM)
Eclectic post!
Greg
|
Which was why I was trying to figure out the post about a clericwith the knowledge domain out damaging an Inquisitor.
The inquisitor has so many sources of bonus's to hit. They really only need a moment or two to become custome murder to whatever the party faces. Teamworks feats in UC got really mean for the inquisitor. too many ways to get attacks of opportunity and the new spells are very effective. Combo Share Judgement with Judgement Light.
The Inquisitor can just be a beast.
knowledge domain > spending skills points on knowledge. seeing as though with a touch attack i can auto success ... everything. then have a second domain to knock up my damage, have better and more spells per day. so a cleric can get just as nuts as an inquisitor.... which is why i said " i dont know why anyone would choose to play an inquisitor over a cleric, unless the fluff aspect is to eye catching."
clear enough?
except quite frankly, in terms of damage dealing, bane alone outshines the second domain and most of the spells. Not that the cleric cant do damage, but its not the monster for it that it was in 3.5. The inquisitor gets a number of specific abilities for damage that it gives up in exchange for the support clerics get.
|
|
except quite frankly, in terms of damage dealing, bane alone outshines the second domain and most of the spells. Not that the cleric cant do damage, but its not the monster for it that it was in 3.5. The inquisitor gets a number of specific abilities for damage that it gives up in exchange for the support clerics get.
i dont really feel like doing a post by post debate about damage from an inquisitor vrs damage from a cleric. just let me tell you that yes a cleric can hit as hard as a inquisitor.
|
|
Which was why I was trying to figure out the post about a clericwith the knowledge domain out damaging an Inquisitor.
The inquisitor has so many sources of bonus's to hit. They really only need a moment or two to become custome murder to whatever the party faces. Teamworks feats in UC got really mean for the inquisitor. too many ways to get attacks of opportunity and the new spells are very effective. Combo Share Judgement with Judgement Light.
The Inquisitor can just be a beast.
knowledge domain > spending skills points on knowledge. seeing as though with a touch attack i can auto success ... everything. then have a second domain to knock up my damage, have better and more spells per day. so a cleric can get just as nuts as an inquisitor.... which is why i said " i dont know why anyone would choose to play an inquisitor over a cleric, unless the fluff aspect is to eye catching."
clear enough?
It's clear enough. Though I wouldn't call it convincing for my playstyle. Inquisitors don't have to touch a monster for their identifying monsters. Half-orcs actually get a nice favored class bonus toward this. Though for the sake of arguement, Inquisitors could take the knowledge domain, but it'd be a waist of a doman, since they already apply their wisdom to identifying monsters. So placing one rank in the Inquisitor's knowledges is really all you need.
A cleric might have the proper spells prepared to engage an enemy. The Inquisitor doesn't necessarily have the right spell for the job, but the Inquisitor definitely has the right tools. Bear in mind this cleric has to touch their foe. The inquisitor can go "Ohh lok it's undead...I am now bane of the undead and I judge you unworthy to exist". I will not argue the clerics superior casting and spell list. I will argue that you don't have to have full casting to be effective or fun to play.
While flame strike, searing light, and holy word might work on some monsters, Bane and Judgement work on every monster.
I wouldn't call utility abilities like Track, Discern Lies, and Detections "fluff" as they are great for the dungeon crawl itself, or roleplaying. They are plenty of reason to play the character. Stalwart should be reason enough to play the class. The worst saves or suck spells can be shrugged off by an Inquisitor.
Overall the Inquisitor brings a lot to the table and offers plenty of dynamic playstyle options. It may not be your cup of tea, but it's not as bad as you seem to think it is.
|
I have always seen them as the divine counterpart to the bard.
They have skills lists that is similar to the bard.
They have the same spell progression, and a similar focus.
Bards get perform, inquisitors get judgements.
Yep this.
They also multi exceptionally well with monks.Currently playing a 4monk/6inq worshiper of Zon-Kuthon.(flowing monk/sin eating inq)
For our Kingmaker game, I am playing a Half Orc Inquisitor of Erastil, and I have to say he's an utter beast. I built him to tank out in AC, which he does quite well, getting up as high as a 33 at level 7. He's packing a +1 Breastplate and +2 Shield, but what really sets him up is the AC bonus from the judgment, the Combat Expertise and Shield Focus feats, and the ability to spontaneously cast Shield of Faith. Combined with the druid's barkskin and the various interchangeable teamwork feats and I have an effective roadblock to keep our spellcasters safe (Witch, Sorcerer, Druid), a dangerous roadblock armed with Bane weapons. It took something attacking at +17 (in a module for levels 4-7) to finally take me out, and really only because of hot rolling by our DM.
Besides this, he rocks social situations. Thanks to the Conversion Inquisition from UM, his Diplomacy and Bluff are skills are awesome, his Sense Motive at a +18. Role-playing wise, I play him up as the hard-line town sheriff, kind of like Jack Pallance (Go on boy.. pick up that longsword.) crossed with Batman. No one threatens the peace of his community and gets away with it.
What I really love is the versatility of builds that an Inquisitor can afford, especially with the right feat/spell selection. For example, my PC's intimidation score is through the roof thanks to being a Half-Orc and the Inquisitor abilities. I had briefly toyed around with the idea of building toward the Hellknight prestige class, using a combination of high Intimidation, Dazzling Display, and one of the Hellknight's powers that makes intimidated foes frightened instead of shaken. Hello, auto-fright!
Anyways, I guess the role of the inquisitor is whatever the situation needs him to adapt to, be it tank, striker, supporter, or debuffer.
-Also, its for people that want to play a badass.