| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I've been looking over the Inquisitor, and I'm not sure I get what his role is or even really what the flavor is supposed to be. In the one sense his BAB and spell progression suggest something that's a little like a cleric-themed Magus, but the weapons available suggests a striker rather than a Tank.
The spells also seem kind of all over the place. Some spells seem like they lean towards tanking - self buffing spells, Compel Hostility, Lock Gaze, a lot seem bent towards debuffing, and some seem more like buffing/leader spells.
I'm also scratching my head a bit at what the archetypal Inquisitor adventurer is, and I can point to an archetype that embodies pretty much every other base class off the top of my head (except maybe the Oracle, though I probably could if I thought about it for two minutes). I'm really only getting evil, interrogating villains and the judges from the Salem Witch Trials. At first I thought maybe Giles Redfern (from Warlock) fit the bill, but on further reflection he's much more of a ranger.
So help me out, interwebs - what role(s) is the Inquistor best at, how does one roleplay one, and who is supposed to be the archetype?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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.
|
They seek out more than just monsters, their job is to hunt things far worse than monsters: people. With their bonuses to intimidation and sense motive they are simply divine hunters, who hunt everything that offends them. Monster, humanoid, and constructs alike, all fall under their purview.
Think of them as a cross between a ranger and a paladin, only they are practically built to live in the gray areas of the world.
|
So I've been looking over the Inquisitor, and I'm not sure I get what his role is or even really what the flavor is supposed to be. In the one sense his BAB and spell progression suggest something that's a little like a cleric-themed Magus, but the weapons available suggests a striker rather than a Tank.
The spells also seem kind of all over the place. Some spells seem like they lean towards tanking - self buffing spells, Compel Hostility, Lock Gaze, a lot seem bent towards debuffing, and some seem more like buffing/leader spells.
I'm also scratching my head a bit at what the archetypal Inquisitor adventurer is, and I can point to an archetype that embodies pretty much every other base class off the top of my head (except maybe the Oracle, though I probably could if I thought about it for two minutes). I'm really only getting evil, interrogating villains and the judges from the Salem Witch Trials. At first I thought maybe Giles Redfern (from Warlock) fit the bill, but on further reflection he's much more of a ranger.So help me out, interwebs - what role(s) is the Inquistor best at, how does one roleplay one, and who is supposed to be the archetype?
In essence a vanilla Inquisitor's strength lies in versitility.
For flavor purposes, he is something simular to VanHelsing, though a lot more fanatical(ends justify the means).
You can tailor an inquisitor to fit almost any role. I played one in society play to level 5. I was new to the game, so in hindsight I would have done a few things differant, but it worked out ok. I choose to go range with the heavy repeating crossbow and used trip manuvers against those that got close to me. Flames of the Faithful is a very good level 2 damage spell. For level 1 I used ear piercing scream a lot. I know there is a guide for optimization on the forums somewhere that seems to be pretty good. Hope that helps.
I guess this makes sense. If Divine Monster Hunter is really what they were going for, I would have brought back a more classic version of "Turn Undead", which is something I really miss from pre-3.5. Channeling just isn't the same.
I guess they also make for decent dragonslayers, then?
|
|
I guess this makes sense. If Divine Monster Hunter is really what they were going for, I would have brought back a more classic version of "Turn Undead", which is something I really miss from pre-3.5. Channeling just isn't the same.
I guess they also make for decent dragonslayers, then?
There are some feats you can take that let your judgements better at a specific enemy(simular to favored enemy of a ranger) They are found in UM. You could do inquisitor/ranger which is something I have seen a few times, then you would get the favored enemy, and that feat does stack with the bonus of favored enemy.
I guess this makes sense. If Divine Monster Hunter is really what they were going for, I would have brought back a more classic version of "Turn Undead", which is something I really miss from pre-3.5. Channeling just isn't the same.
I guess they also make for decent dragonslayers, then?
Paladins make the best dragon slayers.
And there is the Turn Undead feat (link to PRD). It does a much easier-to-run undead fear effect from channeling.
If you're looking for a role they can do a lot of things.
I play them as a skirmisher in combat (mobile and single hard hits) and they have a HUGE amount of weapon versatility with their spells and Bane; they can make anything they pick up deadly.
They, ya know, ask questions and gather information really well and can track. Again, witch hunter.
They're one of my favorite classes, definitely my favorite divine class, and really well rounded. They can do a bit of everything. They're niche in combat seems to be a skirmisher or buffing fighter though.
|
If you're looking for a role they can do a lot of things.
I play them as a skirmisher in combat (mobile and single hard hits) and they have a HUGE amount of weapon versatility with their spells and Bane; they can make anything they pick up deadly.They, ya know, ask questions and gather information really well and can track. Again, witch hunter.
They're one of my favorite classes, definitely my favorite divine class, and really well rounded. They can do a bit of everything. They're niche in combat seems to be a skirmisher or buffing fighter though.
look up the definition of inquisitor... and there you go. they are a truth seeker.
|
So I've been looking over the Inquisitor, and I'm not sure I get what his role is or even really what the flavor is supposed to be. In the one sense his BAB and spell progression suggest something that's a little like a cleric-themed Magus, but the weapons available suggests a striker rather than a Tank.
The spells also seem kind of all over the place. Some spells seem like they lean towards tanking - self buffing spells, Compel Hostility, Lock Gaze, a lot seem bent towards debuffing, and some seem more like buffing/leader spells.
I'm also scratching my head a bit at what the archetypal Inquisitor adventurer is, and I can point to an archetype that embodies pretty much every other base class off the top of my head (except maybe the Oracle, though I probably could if I thought about it for two minutes). I'm really only getting evil, interrogating villains and the judges from the Salem Witch Trials. At first I thought maybe Giles Redfern (from Warlock) fit the bill, but on further reflection he's much more of a ranger.So help me out, interwebs - what role(s) is the Inquistor best at, how does one roleplay one, and who is supposed to be the archetype?
Think gritty Paladin. All of the hunting and killing of evil without that pesky honor code.
What the heck's a "striker"?
Also, I didn't realize "leader" was an archetype or character class. In my experience, a group's leader usually has more to do with roleplaying elements than character class...
What the heck's a "striker"?
Also, I didn't realize "leader" was an archetype or character class. In my experience, a group's leader usually has more to do with roleplaying elements than character class...
I believe Leader Role is part of 4E's balanced party. A role between melee and ranged that focuses on giving orders and holding the line where needed. I may be wrong though, been year(s?) since I've picked up a 4E book.
I played (and prefer) the Justicar, the non spell casting version from Super Genius Games' "Advanced Options--Inquisitor's Judgements". I ran one as a bounty hunter seeking to bring a blasphemous cleric to justice.
I'm thinking about playing a lawful evil inquisitor as an anti-paladin. Seems a lot less likely to outrage people than using the anti-paladin class, for whatever reason.
|
|
To answer some other questions: Pathfinder doesn't have roles like 4e does. Typically speaking you want one or two who are capable of healing, but that may not be their primary job, for example: a paladin is an excellent healer, they can keep an entire party rolling far longer than normal, but his primary job can either be hitting his enemies, repeatedly, really hard, or playing meat shield for the rest of the group, by being a beacon of good and law he really gets extra attention from his enemies.
You also want someone who can take hits well, (eidolons do a pretty good job of this, as do fighters, paladins, barbarians, and cavaliers) someone to be good at magic and all things magic related (including identifying items), and someone who can disarm traps, even if they have to do it with their hp.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What's the role of an inquisitor?
Being awesome.
^This.
Seriously, though, Pathfinder is more about choosing character abilities that suit your style of play, rather than filling roles. The Inquisitor fills the role of a roguish, divine spellcaster with bard-level combat and spellcasting capabilities (though he is more self-oriented than the bard is). This is a combination that is difficult to pull off, let alone well, without the inquisitor class (Rogue/Cleric COULD work, but it doesn't do much more than give a cleric sneak attack >_>).
Check out Howard's Solomon Kane short stories. You'll get a better feel for the Inquisitor.
Exactly how I interpret the class. I made mine along the lines of Solomon Kane, even to using a figure that looks like Kane and painting it that way. I made mine a Cheliaxian with heavy leanings towards enforcing LAW. The fun is in having him interpret Law in his own way.
His overall philosophy (which I used in my Pathfinder Chronicle story "The Politics of Hell") is, "The law cannot persuade where it cannot punish."
|
The inquisitor can change on the spot. Oh we need more damage, bam, I'm hitting hard now, we need heals, bam, healed. They are tough and durable and fun to play. I suggest trying to do a little of everything, and choose spells that help in niche situations. Remove x, cure moderate, get around dr spells. Mine hit lvl 6 and is having a blast.
One of the goblins in my PbP thread is a 4th level inquisitor. He only uses a sling for a ranged weapon (I'd use a bow, myself, but it's his character), and he's still all kinds of awesome. Very good at lots of things.
Bane: the best class ability in the game, by far.
I have a lvl 10 char (2 ranger/8 inquisitor) in a campaign that is currently on break. He's easily the one of the hardest hitting characters in the group, second only to the TH Fighter. He is also almost as effective in non-combat or social situations as our Wizard. Really a fantastic character.
As a side note, he was made well before UM came out and if I could rebuild him I would likely drop the ranger levels and just take the feat that gives your judgement the favored enemy bonus (he's an undead hunter).
Check out Howard's Solomon Kane short stories. You'll get a better feel for the Inquisitor.Exactly how I interpret the class. I made mine along the lines of Solomon Kane, even to using a figure that looks like Kane and painting it that way. I made mine a Cheliaxian with heavy leanings towards enforcing LAW. The fun is in having him interpret Law in his own way.
His overall philosophy (which I used in my Pathfinder Chronicle story "The Politics of Hell") is, "The law cannot persuade where it cannot punish."
Have you seen the Solomon Kane movie? It's pretty awesome IMO.
I like Sin Eater archetype best: so they are warriors that are fueled by those the death of those they kill (free healing).
Since you can worship Gorum and get Greatsword proficiency. You have a Conan character with spells (not as dumb, as Conan was not).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Along with what everybody`s said: gritty not-Paladin mixed with Ranger... I just call it Divine Bat-Man.
They come with a wide variety of tools/toys, just like Batman, some offensive, some defensive, some utility,
and they have the skills to play skill-monkey and the spells to augment that further.
Divine Batman sums it up for me. Alot of `utility` spells effectively mean `I have some chance to do something remotely effective when dealing with X type of enemy/encounter who would otherwise be able bypass/dominate a mundane archer/melee type`.
They do have alot going on, and it`s probably easy to get distracted by that and not be as `optimized`/effective...
Which is OK in of itself, but probably why they are an `advanced` class option in the APG, not Core.
Search the boards here and I^m sure you´ll find some builds showing how SCARY powerful they can be at high level.
(that`s a bit tempered by how awesome Barbarians are now with Ultimate Combat)
They seem like they make very versatile NPC opponents/challenges, at least in the right setting/with preparation.
Their versatility means a recurring villain can easiliy have the tools for a wide variety of types of encounters.
What the heck's a "striker"?
Also, I didn't realize "leader" was an archetype or character class. In my experience, a group's leader usually has more to do with roleplaying elements than character class...
A striker is a glass cannon. Does a lot of damage without getting hurt. Like a rogue or ranger. This is what leaped out at me when I saw that the Inquisitor's weapons were simple plus ranged - that he doesn't belong in the BBEG's face.
I did get the term "leader" from 4e, but I mostly play PF. A leader specializes in party buffs, healing, and protection. It probably started as a nicer way to say "healbot"; personally I think the term applies best to bards, who specialize in inspiring their teammates to do better.You know, leading.
I had a Solomon Kane book growing up but never read it. I know Van Helsing but am more of a fan of the Anthony Hopkins version (which doesn't seem to fit) than the Hugh Jackman (which I hated). I keep coming back to Giles Redfern from Warlock - am I the only one who's seen this movie?
Can you tell me about the flavor of some of your characters? The picture I'm getting is like a creepy, uncompromising religious antagonist type. Should I be thinking more like spellcasting detective?
I should add that I am interested in playing one because I want to play a divine character but never do because I can't stand clerics.
I have always seen them as divine bards. Same BAB, Spell progession skill points etc. They are both versitile jack's of all trades. I only get to play for a few hours very week, so my real experience is limited, but they strike me as stronger then bards. as with most things it really a matter of personal taste.
Can you tell me about the flavor of some of your characters? The picture I'm getting is like a creepy, uncompromising religious antagonist type. Should I be thinking more like spellcasting detective?I should add that I am interested in playing one because I want to play a divine character but never do because I can't stand clerics.
You could stop thinking of them as lawful: only lawfgul types are uncompromising.
And they are rarely ever antagonist: van Helsing is a protagonist.
Can you name one antagonist from popular culture? Warlock is a arcane caster in the movie (really can you even cast the spells he cast as an Inquisitor I don't think you can).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can you tell me about the flavor of some of your characters? The picture I'm getting is like a creepy, uncompromising religious antagonist type. Should I be thinking more like spellcasting detective?I should add that I am interested in playing one because I want to play a divine character but never do because I can't stand clerics.
You could stop thinking of them as lawful: only lawfgul types are uncompromising.
And they are rarely ever antagonist: van Helsing is a protagonist.
Can you name one antagonist from popular culture? Warlock is a arcane caster in the movie (really can you even cast the spells he cast as an Inquisitor I don't think you can).
Giles Redfern was not the Warlock, he was the witch hunter. His entire mission in life was hunting down the warlock, and he was a puritanical New Englander from the 17th Century. He didn't cast spells per say (cuz magic is the devil's handiwork), but he had some quasi-magical gear (the witch compass) and he knew all the warlock's strengths and weaknesses. He had some funny moments, but they were all fish out of water time travel shtick. In a medieval/ historical environment, I don't think he'd be nearly as much fun.
Antagonist Inquisitors? Like the guys who tortured Braveheart to death? Or burned Joan of Arc for witchcraft? Or persecute gypsies and hunchbacks in Notre Dame? Or try and persecute Sean Connery and Christian Slater for heresy? Or pop in on English couples unexpectedly?
|
|
What the heck's a "striker"?
Also, I didn't realize "leader" was an archetype or character class. In my experience, a group's leader usually has more to do with roleplaying elements than character class...
A striker is a glass cannon. Does a lot of damage without getting hurt. Like a rogue or ranger. This is what leaped out at me when I saw that the Inquisitor's weapons were simple plus ranged - that he doesn't belong in the BBEG's face.
I did get the term "leader" from 4e, but I mostly play PF. A leader specializes in party buffs, healing, and protection. It probably started as a nicer way to say "healbot"; personally I think the term applies best to bards, who specialize in inspiring their teammates to do better.
You know, leading.I had a Solomon Kane book growing up but never read it. I know Van Helsing but am more of a fan of the Anthony Hopkins version (which doesn't seem to fit) than the Hugh Jackman (which I hated). I keep coming back to Giles Redfern from Warlock - am I the only one who's seen this movie?
Can you tell me about the flavor of some of your characters? The picture I'm getting is like a creepy, uncompromising religious antagonist type. Should I be thinking more like spellcasting detective?
I should add that I am interested in playing one because I want to play a divine character but never do because I can't stand clerics.
I've seen Warlock and the Giles Redfern match isn't that far off. I can see a character like that for the inquisitors built around hunting magic users.
As for the Van Helsing look, the character can fit either. Either an action based younger monster hunter or an older hunter who uses his wits to the best of his ability.
I've played two. One was basically a paladin. Very rigid, unswerving, and self-righteous. He was built to hunt undead, demons, and the like.
I also had one that was a follower of Caiden who was more free and easy going. He was built to stop spellcasters and anyone who would take the freedom of others. he ended up hunting mainly undead, aberrations, and dragons, with some outsiders thrown in for seasoning.. both the same class, but entirely different feels.
Antagonist Inquisitors? Like the guys who tortured Braveheart to death? Or burned Joan of Arc for witchcraft? Or persecute gypsies and hunchbacks in Notre Dame? Or try and persecute Sean Connery and Christian Slater for heresy? Or pop in on English couples unexpectedly?
Okay, what part of those characters screamed Inquisitor to you, instead of commoner?
I mean, what does the class have similar. If it is the name, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, the name is meaningless.|
|
A striker is a glass cannon. Does a lot of damage without getting hurt. Like a rogue or ranger.What the heck's a "striker"?
Also, I didn't realize "leader" was an archetype or character class. In my experience, a group's leader usually has more to do with roleplaying elements than character class...
Rangers have a d10, the are only squishy in comparison to fighters, paladins, cavaliers, and some barbarians. Even that's debatable, the best way to become survivable is by having a high AC, high dex= high AC usually, and they have healing magic starting at 7th, well... except paladins, who are probably the single toughest class in the game currently. Lay on hands goes a long way.
I should add that I am interested in playing one because I want to play a divine character but never do because I can't stand clerics.
Play a paladin? You can get a good read on your GM if you do, if he makes it exceedingly difficult, find a new GM because he's likely to have a few really bad points. If he makes it a challenge to play, but is fair, and rewards you for it, then stick with that GM. If he doesn't care one way or the other, stick with him.
Play a paladin? You can get a good read on your GM if you do, if he makes it exceedingly difficult, find a new GM because he's likely to have a few really bad points. If he makes it a challenge to play, but is fair, and rewards you for it, then stick with that GM. If he doesn't care one way or the other, stick with him.
Eh, I'm not too interested in playing a Paladin, and anyway there already is one in most of the games I'm involved in. What I can't stand about clerics is how much of their time is spent being the healbot, not so much the flavor. I feel like I'm better at debuffers, casters, and dex/ranged/artillery guys more than tanks, anyway.
You were all helpful, but "divine bard" and "stealthy cleric" make the most sense to me. Thanks all.
Antagonist Inquisitors? Like the guys who tortured Braveheart to death? Or burned Joan of Arc for witchcraft? Or persecute gypsies and hunchbacks in Notre Dame? Or try and persecute Sean Connery and Christian Slater for heresy? Or pop in on English couples unexpectedly?
Okay, what part of those characters screamed Inquisitor to you, instead of commoner?
I mean, what does the class have similar. If it is the name, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, the name is meaningless.
Well, none of those characters are commoners. They're all in positions of power and represent major threats to their relevant protaganists ('cept maybe the English folk at home).
Anyway, those were the Inquisitors I knew. It seemed odd to base a PC class on them.
Hence, ya know, this thread.
|
|
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.
+1
Though I'd say they are more quase ranger/paladin sacraficing weapons for more spells, neat tricks, and useful abilities.
Put another way, I can talk to non-gamers who are nonetheless pop-culture savvy, point to Sir Lancelot, and say, "That there is a Paladin. He's real good and rides a horse and swings a sword and stuff." Nods.
I can point to Aragorn and say, "That there is a ranger. He shoots a bow and arrow and sleeps in the woods and stuff." More nods.
I can point to Conan the Barbarian and say, "That there is a Barbarian if ever there was one. He gets mad and chops people in half with a six-foot sword and stuff." Yup, sure is.
If I point to Professor Van Helsing and say, "That there is an Inquisitor,", the record will scratch, music will stop, and people will start pointing out that he doesn't wear red robes, persecute people for witchcraft, or speak Spanish.
Now if I said it about the judges of the Salem Witch trials, I suspect peeps would scratch their heads and gradually agree. Same goes for the McCarthy era witch hunts. Because Inquisition has come to mean "a harsh or rigorous interrogation that violates the rights of an individual".
Not arguing with the class name or anything, I just wanted to make sure I got it right. They're redefining and that's ok. Witches, monks, and alchemists tend to mean a different thing in the real world, too.
If I'm reading the room right, maybe the Pathfinder Inquisitor is a bit like Ichabod Crane in the Tim Burton Sleepy Hollow. Swap out the law/government for fill-in-the-blank church. Or deity, maybe. Basically an Inspector/Investigator type, yes? But way more effective than the Inspector Rogue Archetype. Sent by a church to check out some awful thing/monster/lich/demon that's happening/roaming/conquering/haunting and shut it down, and meets up with a party of adventurers who are interested in same. Or the party is hired by the Church, or whatever. This sounds a bit more in line with the "Batman" comparison that somebody made, with maybe a bit of Fox Mulder or even James Bond thrown in. (This is all role-in-the-story talk, by the way, not so much mechanics).
As I look over the description again, features like Stern Gaze, detect alignment, track, and discern lies all point to this being a class that's really good with murder mysteries. I think I'll build mine as a Sherlock Holmes type with a sense of humor like Doctor Who.
For an example of Inquisitors here are two I play. I don't play up the hunter aspect so much. I see clerics as servants of a God's church. The Inquisitors I play are more the avatar or embodiment of the God.
One is an Inquisitor of Besmara. An act of greed caused his life to spiral out of control. A second act of greed caused Besmara to take interest. She drowned him and brought him back as her avatar to ensure she gets the proper respect from the Pirates of the Shackles. Has the Sea Domain. Played like the High Plain Drifter in a Pirate Movie as opposed to a Western.
The second is not aware he is Cayden's champion at first level. A blackout drunken party that seemed to span a week and several continents has him trying to piece together the details and pull his life back together. He unknowingly bought Cayden a drink with his last coin and has been rewarded with divine gifts as he had been singled out for his reckless bravery. Has the Bravery Inquisition that should be handy in Carrion Crown. He is a happy go lucky drunk who always gets in trouble and escapes with charm and luck.
|
|
Eh, I'm not too interested in playing a Paladin, and anyway there already is one in most of the games I'm involved in. What I can't stand about clerics is how much of their time is spent being the healbot, not so much the flavor. I feel like I'm better at debuffers, casters, and dex/ranged/artillery guys more than tanks, anyway.
You were all helpful, but "divine bard" and "stealthy cleric" make the most sense to me. Thanks all.
Paladins work well as ranged combatants, some of the better builds are ranged, they don't debuff well, but the Inquisitor isn't so hot on that either. My favorite character was an archer paladin. Though she was really weird, she was all thinky, using logic, and had a wide variety of knowledge skills.
Real tanks carry the single largest ground-based, direct-fire, weapon that modern militaries put into the field, and they carry several extra weapons for dealing with large groups of infantry.
People confusing meat-shields with actual tanks offends me somewhat, especially since I used to drive/operate one.
The paladin in Pathfinder mimics this very efficiently, especially when they smite, they suddenly start hitting incredibly hard, with unn\erring accuracy. they ignore DR, their AC jumps up like it found a spider under the toilet seat, and they are probably still healing themselves. The primary point of the tank is it's cannon.
Okay, so my next question is: how do you build your Inquisitor? The ranged weapons and buffing spells say that Dexterity is probably your prime requisite (and it's the most useful ability all-around anyway). The spells and many of the class features rely on a WIS boost. It seems like a halfway social character, so Charisma shouldn't be an absolute dump, although it looks like you make up for low Charisma and Intelligence scores because the Wisdom bonus boosts key abilities. And no character that wields weapons and/or stealths should dump Constitution.
How do your guys look, ability-wise?
Paladins work well as ranged combatants, some of the better builds are ranged, they don't debuff well, but the Inquisitor isn't so hot on that either.
Really? As I look at the Inquisitor's 1st-level spells I see Bane, Command, Compel Hostility, Forbid Action, Haze of Dreams, Litany of Sloth, Litany of Weakness and Lock Gaze in the enchantment school, and I see Cause Fear, Doom, Inflict Light Wounds (technically not a debuff), Interrogation, and Persuasive Goad from the Necromancy school. As spontaneous casters, putting a feat each into SF: Necromancy and Enchantment would make this guy an excellent debuffer, no?
I see some help for ranged, too - Longshot, Magic Weapon, True Strike, Unerring Weapon, Weapons Against Evil. Sinking feats into rangery feats like point blank, precise, rapid could lead to devastating effect, yes?
What am I missing?
I only meant Tank in the lots of hit points, well armored, gets in the bad guy's face. But then, I guess I can't go on a litany about real world Inquisitor's and then call shenanigans when you point out that taking damage isn't the role of real tanks, and that you model your Paladins after the real ones to supposedly good effect.
So touche to you, good sir.
Have you seen the Solomon Kane movie? It's pretty awesome IMO.Check out Howard's Solomon Kane short stories. You'll get a better feel for the Inquisitor.Exactly how I interpret the class. I made mine along the lines of Solomon Kane, even to using a figure that looks like Kane and painting it that way. I made mine a Cheliaxian with heavy leanings towards enforcing LAW. The fun is in having him interpret Law in his own way.
His overall philosophy (which I used in my Pathfinder Chronicle story "The Politics of Hell") is, "The law cannot persuade where it cannot punish."
Yeah, I thought they did a good job with it. Much better than they've pulled off with three Conan attempts now. They made Howard's version of the world seem like just the place a Solomon Kane would be needed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Put another way, I can talk to non-gamers who are nonetheless pop-culture savvy, point to Sir Lancelot, and say, "That there is a Paladin. He's real good and rides a horse and swings a sword and stuff." Nods.
Actually, Lancelot wasn't a paladin. His son, Sir Galahad, was the paladin. And for a great read on the Arthurian stories with some real grit to it read "Parsival or a Knight's Tale" by Richard Monaco.
Parsival and Galahad are two differing versions of a paladin to use as examples for RPG play; Galahad is pure by choice and Parsival by naivete.
|
|
Really?
Yes, really, they have a limited number of spells for debuffing, they are better than the paladin, but they still don't have the kind of juju the other classes I mentioned have, by virtue of only going to 7th level spells, and having relatively few. Especially considering they might want to heal at some point, just in case. Plus, there is the MAD you have to worry about.
Personally, I prefer the Vimes version of a paladin, mean spirited, but a being built almost entirely on good and law, because he was unable to enforce it properly (due to politics), couldn't really handle the job well.
Actually, Lancelot wasn't a paladin.
Well, my nits are officially picked clean.
To follow up on the Batman thing, besides the normal Divine spells and Inquisitor-specific spells,
they also get a good number of spells that are ´normally´ arcane (that Clerics don´t normally get),
which is why I get the feeling of having a tool-chest of toys ala Batman.
Their various Class abilities let you get away with not having a high stat in certain areas, by applying another stat or scaling benefit to that area. To be good at that area, you won´t want to dump the normal stat, but you don´t need a really good stat to pull it off (match somebody whose prime stat covers that skill).
A bunch of abilities work well with Ranged... But they also work good as Melee...
There´s more melee-focused Teamwork feats for one (to use with Solo tactics).
But they are mostly weapon-independent, so can ´switch hit´ (melee + ranged) easily.
(Repeating Crossbow Proficiency is a nice side-benefit for anybody, whether you focus on that or not)
Grabbing a better weapon proficiency some way or another (Feat, Class Dip, etc) is pretty easy.
1 level of Fighter and you get Full Martial, Heavy Armor, and a bonus Feat.
And don´t forget that Inquisitors gain the Deity´s Favored Weapon...
(Ragathiel, Son-of-a-Devil Empyreal Lord likes Bastard Swords FYI
...and offers Domains: Archon (nice de-buff) and Rage (yeah) amongst others.)
I can see Inquisitor mixing well, mechanically and thematically, with a Monk or Rogue dip using WIS-based Ki abilities.
(or Ninja if you are OK using CHA for Ki, or can house-rule an alternate version that uses WIS like the Rogue Ki Pool Talent)
I have a PFS character who died in his 1st game that I´m thinking of resurrecting as an Inquisitor, since I like the Divine connection with this character, but ´Full Caster´ isn´t really what I want as much as sneaksy, skillsy, Batman type of character (he´s a ´favored´ of Sivhana, Goddess of Illusion if you want to know, with a birthmark that looks like her holy symbol).
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.