but for real, they get proficiency with all the bows and seemingly only the bows save for their deity's favorite weapon, so how did they not get gravity bow?
rangers get it, so i know it exists as a divine spell
not only that, but archer paladins who take unsanctioned knowledge should also have access to this imo
anyone else agree?
I don't have a problem with inquisitors getting gravity bow. So long as druids get it first.
My druid is actually in the process right now of researching it to add to her spell list.
gravity bows for everyone!!!!
Turning my 1d10 Heavy Repeating Crossbow into a 2d8 Heavy Repeating Crossbow sounds delicious, but I can't help but imagine that my DM'd be like "haha, no."
Unless he's a ranger or can use wands I suppose.
Well, my Inquisitor can, obviously, but he's also currently poor. And totally not a Ranger.Turning my 1d10 Heavy Repeating Crossbow into a 2d8 Heavy Repeating Crossbow sounds delicious, but I can't help but imagine that my DM'd be like "haha, no."Unless he's a ranger or can use wands I suppose.
thats the point tho, if they are willing to give it to rangers because of their archery flare, then inquisitors should have it even more so because they are proficient almost exclusively with bows
i guess if someone wanted to move this to suggestions they could, but the question is:
Given a precedent, why do Inquisitors not have this spell on their list?
I would agree that "why do the rules say..." questions probably don't belong in the rules forum. Having said that my answer to "why do the rules say inquisitors don't get gravity bow?" is that if you are expecting complete consistency, rationality, logic and/or common sense in the rules of Pathfinder, this isn't likely to be even near the top of your disappointments...
I think a more specific answer is because it becomes a spell that every single inquisitor will always take as a spell known. As a class based almost exclusively on using ranged weapons, it's too good of an option for them. Druids are not as strong physical combatants with weapons (not to say they're weak, but they're best when they're in wildshape) and aren't even proficient with bows automatically, so it's a niche spell that will be a great option for some druids but is not an auto-include for all druids.
They question is why can't my preferred class have some benefit that another class has?
The answer is simple: Balance.
While i'm seeing this, just a quick off topic question: Is there a damage table for all weapon sizes anywhere (from diminutive to colossal)?
While i'm seeing this, just a quick off topic question: Is there a damage table for all weapon sizes anywhere (from diminutive to colossal)?
I'm not sure there isn't, but if that's the case, you can extrapolate it easily enough by browsing through the bestiary if you're stuck. The Huge giant is going to be wielding a Huge weapon, etc.
Heh. My DM loves when our party beefs up our range attacks. We roll an incredibly high number of wild shots; one of my characters was a Cleric with Luck Domain. He would just hang out by the insanely powerful archer and give him Touch of Luck each round; kept the wild shots down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They question is why can't my preferred class have some benefit that another class has?
The answer is simple: Balance.
Right... Rangers, a +1 BAB class that can produce one of the most awesomely overpowered archer builds in the game get gravity bow, but inquisitors, a 3/4 BAB class that I've never seen described as "Inquisitor kills my BBEG in one round" don't get it because of...
... 'balance'...
Snrk!
|
So essentially:
- all the classes that can easily cast spells should get gravity bow;
- all the other classes can forget ranged combat.
Is that the idea?
When you want to make something practically mandatory to stay on par in ranged combat it is better to make it available to everyone, making it available to two classes instead of one don't make it better, it make it worse.
If we're making a list of indefensible spell list exclusions, let's just add that druids don't get "eagle's splendor" to that list.
I mean WTF?
Good topic. Though, I will say, Gravity Bow isn't just on the Ranger List...
Its on the Sorc/Wiz list as well.
As soon as you can make sense of that, let me know.
its not so much that i just want to buff them, but it seems illogical that they dont get it, since its kinda the point of the class
|
I am very willing to argue that the point of the Inquisitor is specifically not to use bows and stuff.
Do damage? Yes. I'd have no problem with Lead Blades and Gravity Bow being added to their spell lists. But they're still very capable of doing their jobs as damage-dealers (and many other tasks besides!) without them.
imo all the 'gish' classes should get the self buffs like lead blades and gravity bow
i guess the only real argument i have for inqusitors not getting holy sword is that they dont get given proficiency with martial weapons, though i wouldnt be opposed to them getting it as a 6th level spell
i'd give inquisitor's holy/unholy/axiomatic/anarchic sword as a 5th level spell. given them acquisition at the same level as a paladin and the ability to use it in at least the final few chapters in an AP.
|
Inquisitors get plenty of self-buffs. They get their Judgment and Bane, plus spells like Wrath, Weapon of Awe, and Divine Favor.
All their buffs tend to be focused on the idea of "I am the hand of my god and through me His will be done", not so much "my bow is fight!".
Are Inquisitors even intended as archers? Yes, the inclusion of bows on their proficiency list is a bit conspicuous, but archery is a deep feat tree and Inquisitors get no help with it. They do get bonus feats, but only teamwork feats, which all expect you to stand next to or flank with an ally. Plus, all their self-buffs work no matter what weapon you use, which explains why Inquisitors don't get it-- it's too specific.
Sorcerers and Wizards getting Lead Blades still makes absolutely no sense.
Between judgments and bane, my inquisitor promptly murders a great many things. And they're both swift actions. Rangers can keep the standard action gravity bow. Gimme a half-orc inquisitor with a falchion and long bow and I'll give you a pile of corpses as your change.
Just have one spell list and any spell caster can pick any spells they want off it.
How much is to much? How much will the Damage total/average/minum be for 1st level with that spell, 5th , 10th, 15th, and 20th. I betting it for balance game play. Also to make the Ranger special and different than the Inquistor or archer Palidian. I mean as it is inquisitor I think are the best striker in the game.
They get bane.
There, problem solved!
ok, i guess if the argument is 'they dont need it to be good' then fine, neither do rangers
thats not the point, the point is the flavor fits so well thematically that i dont understand how they didnt get it
rangers arent all archers, and wizards dont even get bow proficiency (they get crossbows)
if you wanna talk about being unique, i say give them their own capstone spell like the paladins holy sword, or rangers instant enemy
its like you guys think gravity bow is a sacred cow we cant take away from just the rangers having...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe the argument is "It may or may not be thematically appropriate, but that is irrelevant because the designers left it off the spell list, presumably for balance issues."
If you gm a game and want to add gravity bow to the inquisitor list, that's fine. If you can convince your gm to let your inquisitor have gravity bow, no one will mind. But you asked why inquisitors don't get gravity bow, and the answer is, probably balance.
probably balance is what i was looking for, though i can also see one of the devs going "oh crap, i cant believe we forgot that one"
i was just curious
I believe the argument is "It may or may not be thematically appropriate, but that is irrelevant because the designers left it off the spell list, presumably for balance issues."
If you gm a game and want to add gravity bow to the inquisitor list, that's fine. If you can convince your gm to let your inquisitor have gravity bow, no one will mind. But you asked why inquisitors don't get gravity bow, and the answer is, probably balance.
As much as I wish it were so, I simply can't quite make myself believe that "balance" is the answer. If gravity bow is a balance issue then rangers would be the last class to get it.
Every class has one or two ways to be broken in some way. I suppose a more accurate way to put it could be, "Since the inquisitor can be broken with judgements and bane, giving them gravity bow would just be ridiculous, so let's leave it as a ranger only thing to balance the general breakage."
I you realy want Gravity Bow on the spell list here is straight up legit way to get it on your spell list as inquisitor play a Sasaran. Not to bad of a race for inquistor Archer in my book.
Samsaran Racial Traits
All samsarans are humanoids with the samsaran subtype. They have the following racial traits.
+2 Intelligence, +2 Wisdom, –2 Constitution: Samsarans are insightful and strong-minded, but their bodies tend to be frail.
Medium: Samsarans are Medium creatures and have no bonuses or penalties due to their size.
Normal Speed: Samsarans have a base speed of 30 feet.
Low-Light Vision (Ex): Samsarans can see twice as far as humans in conditions of dim light.
Lifebound (Ex): Samsarans gain a +2 racial bonus on all saving throws made to resist death effects, saving throws against negative energy effects, Fortitude saves made to remove negative levels, and Constitution checks made to stabilize if reduced to negative hit points.
Samsaran Magic (Sp): Samsarans with a Charisma score of 11 or higher gain the following spell-like abilities: 1/day—comprehend languages, deathwatch, and stabilize. The caster level for these effects is equal to the samsaran's level.
Shards of the Past (Ex): A samsaran's past lives grant her bonuses on two particular skills. A samsaran chooses two skills—she gains a +2 racial bonus on both of these skills, and they are treated as class skills regardless of what class she actually takes.
Languages: Samsarans begin play speaking Common and Samsaran. Samsarans with high Intelligence scores can choose from the following: any human language, Abyssal, Aquan, Auran, Celestial, Draconic, Giant, Ignan, Infernal, Nagaji, Tengu, and Terran.
Mystic Past Life (Su): You can add spells from another spellcasting class to the spell list of your current spellcasting class. You add a number of spells equal to 1 + your spellcasting class's key ability score bonus (Wisdom for clerics, and so on). The spells must be the same type (arcane or divine) as the spellcasting class you're adding them to.. For example, you could add divine power to your druid class spell list, but not to your wizard class spell list because divine power is a divine spell. These spells do not have to be spells you can cast as a 1st-level character. The number of spells granted by this ability is set at 1st level. Changes to your ability score do not change the number of spells gained. This racial trait replaces shards of the past.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Imagine archer rangers without gravity bow. Now imagine the forum rage over how much archer rangers without gravity bow sucked at archery in comparison to fighter archers. Now you understand why gravity bow exists.
Now compare inquisitor archers to fighter archers. Nobody thinks that an inquisitor archer sucks at archery. They just get too many attack/damage self-buffs for anybody to seriously contend that inquisitors suck at archery.
In short, rangers need gravity bow and inquisitors don't. When rangers get divine favor, wrath, weapon of awe, divine power, let alone judgments and bane, then I will start thinking maybe inquisitors need gravity bow for parity.
As to why it's on the sorc/wiz spell list, my guess would be that it's thematically appropriate to arcane spells since it's more "science-y." Also it helps arcane caster dips or multiclass builds like EKs.
Is it just me or is anyone else tired of the Samsarans already?
Is it just me or is anyone else tired of the Samsarans already?
+1!
ya inquisitors are crazy good even without.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't mind an Inquisitor's lack of Gravity Bow.
If i would ask for anything, i would want Litany of Righteousness to actually work for an inquisitor. Inquisitors do not have an aura, so this " should have been left off of the Inquisitor spell list."-James Jacobs
I would also ask that Inquisitors get either all martial weapons or access to more martial weapons. Having to rely on a god's choice of favored weapon is counter-intuitive to the flavor of playing an inquisitor.
Woot, my cool concept fits this god, but my god's weapon is a dagger? WTF???
Those would be the things i'd be asking for first.