|
I have always been a fan of Divine classes...well in previous versions of the game, Clerics.
Even for all their power, I have enjoyed the flavour, but this isn't about that. it is about the mechanics.
I really don't like Inquistors and Warpriests. Both seem to have really cool abilities...that becomes 'meh' when I put a character together using the class.
Inquisitors:
More skill points is good.
The spell list is decent, though I think it is kind of stunted.
Inquisitions/Domains, with no bonus spells from Domains and Inquisitions weak in general these are not as exciting as I would hope.
Judgements seem like they should be full of more win, but they aren't. 1/day to start with a slow increase @ 4th plus 3 levels. They scream 15 minute work day. The bonus' they give are just okay.
d8 plus medium BAB and Cleric saves. Middle of the road.
The teamwork stuff is decent, but with such a true small selection of teamwork feats that are seemingly worth it this ability loses it luster fast.
Cunning Initiative and Monster Lore are good...
Bane wants to shine...but with it reduced to rounds a day...sigh.
Warpriests:
Cleric saves, HD, skill points BAB...average
Spells..Cleric list is good, stunted casting is meh.
--As an aside on 6 Level spell casters...losing 7th and higher spells is more than enough of a balancing point, but to also increase the level that 6thlevel casters get their spells seems to stunting.
Blessings are good.
Weapon focus is all right...good thing that they get one free because...
Sacred Weapon relies on it. Again, an ability that wants to be a winner but is rounds a day. The damage boosting portion of Sacred Weapon is terrible. Any warpriest of a martial style gods gets nothing out of this until 10th level, in reality.
Fervor. This is good.
Sacred Armor. Why so late?
Bonus feats and the ability to count as a fighter for feats is decent.
So, yeah. They seem to be near the cusp of being good classes but fall short...or am I missing something?
"Bonus feats and the ability to count as a fighter for feats is decent"
there is a catch there.
the warpriest ONLY count as fighter for ONLY his bonus feats.
the warpriest cant count himself fighter for other normal feats.(unlike other classes such as brawler which is kinda wierd hate nerf)
that mean that weapon specilization can only be taken with the 6th level bonus feat and above and other feats that need higher level fighter also get knocked back a bit.
if you have no intent on taking fighter needed feats (or not alot of them and not early on) then they are ok, but one need to realy sit down and write up his character up to level 20 before taking starting just to make sure he get the right feat opened at the right level.
Have you tried reading any guides for these classes to see what you may be missing. The Inquisitor is often regarded as borderline overpowered. The warpriest is more for flavor than power, but still offers very high sustained DPS by being able to buff itself every round while still doing full attack damage.
More importantly, what classes are you comparing these classes too?
Rounds/level abilities are actually not that bad, which you seem to be super against on principle.
|
|
Have you tried reading any guides for these classes to see what you may be missing. The Inquisitor is often regarded as borderline overpowered. The warpriest is more for flavor than power, but still offers very high sustained DPS by being able to buff itself every round while still doing full attack damage.
More importantly, what classes are you comparing these classes too?
I have gone through the Inq guide before, in an attempt to get my head around why people like them so much and why they are powerful. I guess it never really took hold, maybe I will look again, I am just trying to cheat the system and hope people can more give some viewpoints as to why.
I am not really comparing them to any class in particular. When I look at the classes I just feel underwhelmed by what they give.
|
|
Rounds/level abilities are actually not that bad, which you seem to be super against on principle.
On principle. Not really. But they are ok abilities that because they are only usable for rounds a day make them...weak? sub-optimal?
These abilities are a cornerstone of the class. At least make them useful for a full combat. Make the duration more like Rage, 3+ability mod...something like that.
|
|
Inquisitor really shines for being flexible. They take a while to really get rolling-- you need a decent set of spells and really your second judgement. The trick is not to nova, save stuff for when you need it until you have a lot of resources (Bane + Judgement is the big one-- until like level 9 or 10, I would definitely not use them together save for a boss fight or desperation)
When most games don't last much beyond pre-teens that is too late to feel like the class was a waste of a pick...IMO.
Warpriest exists to beat the Fighter up and take its lunch money. It trades BAB/hit die for a second good save and spells with the swift-action buff capability, then swaps Weapon/Armor Training for... crappy other stuff. And gets Blessings, which are pretty fantastic if you pick carefully (do I love Minor Luck's total lack of a duration? Yes I do).
lol...poor fighter.
Like I said Blessings are good...too much of the other stuff isn't though.
|
|
The coolest part of the Warpriest is the way you can take weapons that might seem to be sub-optimal for damage and make them awesome.
I'm working on two different Warpriest ideas. One dual wield kukris, the other uses the whip.
Why is that significant? Well, at first level its a d6 whip/kukri. Then it becomes a d8 whip/kukri. Then d10, 2d6, and 2d8. Just imagine at 10th level have a d10 (15+ x2) weapon; my character can put out a +20 to damage relatively easy, too. Only takes one buff spell and a self-blessing.
Sure, and Dagger builds get more out of the class too...but that is not most builds. Or it becomes a class of niche builds.
How many weapons don't have at least a d6 damage die? So Sacred Weapon is bascially useless for the first 4 levels until you can boost the enhancement.
i thought that the Sacred Damage boost would work best as a bonus to your weapon damage. So for 3+Wis Mod in rounds your weapon deals base die plus Sacred Weapon damage.
|
|
Sacred Weapon relies on it. Again, an ability that wants to be a winner but is rounds a day. The damage boosting portion of Sacred Weapon is terrible. Any warpriest of a martial style gods gets nothing out of this until 10th level, in reality.The idea is to make warpriests of non-martial gods viable, i.e. Pharasma and Desna for instance. That way you don't have the case of the only viable warpriest being the one who uses greatswords.
See my thought on this in the post above.
EDIT: My above post...
Sacred weapon isn't even bad. It just gets out competed by all of your other abilities. It at first offers a straight dpr boost, then at later levels offers high flexibility for overcoming the unexpected. And while round limited isn't great, you'll never really run out of it. You probably won't even start it until the 2nd or 3rd round of combat as it is yet another swift action. And fervor is just too good.
The only major problem with the warpriest is that so much of what it can do relies on the same limited action.
|
Inquisitor is amazing. Specifically, Inquisitor is amazing because of buff-stacking and how that works. Think Bard, only more selfish, rather than Cleric.
An Inquisitor, at, oh, 6th level, can have, not counting BAB or Ability scores and with only a round of prep, +6 to hit, and +4 +2d6 damage. That's really good.
And they're actually really good skill-monkeys to boot. Which is a lot of fun and really effective if done right. Again, think Bard more than Cleric.
The Teamwork Feats are solid, but if you dislike them, the Preacher Archetype gives them up for some pretty solid bonuses.
Warpriest...is intended to be a Divine Magus, but has some problems actually living up to that. I have some serious issues with the power level of this Class myself.
Inquisitor is actually becoming one of my favorite classes.
Judgement starts at 1 a day. Fine just use it on the boss fight. There is rarely more than one pull-out-all-the-stops-this-is-a-killer fight in a day. The lesser fights, it is not needed.
Yes, many of the abilities are limited in rounds per day. But I rarely find myself running out of them. Again, against a few mooks it isn't needed. Save it for the few significant fights in a day.
Limited spell casting. But if you mostly take buffs and utility spells, there are usually just enough to get by.
Piles-O-Skills and more bonuses to some of the best skills.
Remember, it is called the 'Inquisitor' not 'Kill Anything in the Way' class. The one who knows things and/or finds out about things. I don't think it is really supposed to be the ultimate combatant.
It is supposed to be the divine generalist and skill monkey. They can be a good diplomat, spy, assassin, investigator, etc... And they can be a pretty decent combatant when necessary.
Personally I can't understand why you would make a greatsword-wielding Warpriest.
What are you going to do with that ridiculous number of combat feats? Maybe if you couldn't access the Human FCB, but even then you have a lot to use. E6 maybe?
I say again though, Warpriests are obnoxiously good archers. They do get a little bogged down on feats in the level 6-9 range, but that's mostly because there are so many awesome feats there.
Did someone call for Gorum's champion?
Also, the Inquisitor is one of the most versatile, effective, well-designed and balanced classes in Pathfinder. It can do pretty much anything you build it to focus on and be okay at doing other things, too. And on top of that, it never outright makes other classes feel like they're extra baggage like T1-2 classes can.
The inquisitor IS my favorite class. I like flexible characters, this is the biggest example of that in the game.
Each of those things the Op marks as 'so-so' is sort of true, except he doesnt realize that with all of those things together, they are really good.
Yes you only get one judgement per day, but it lasts the entire encounter, no matter how long it lasts. Bane is rounds per level true, but you can get extra bane, plus you dont need it constantly, leave it off on rounds you are moving into position or buffing, then use it on the rounds you go to town. Speaking of buffing, dont forget, when you are low on bane, and have used your judgement you still have divine spells. A bless or divine favor spell can go a long way at low levels when you dont have a lot of judgements.
Combine that with fun abilities around skills and a bunch of skill points, this is an excellent class. He isnt the best at any one thing, he's not supposed to be. But he can do alot of things well for a short time. Which is how flexible classes are supposed to work.
|
|
Each of those things the Op marks as 'so-so' is sort of true, except he doesnt realize that with all of those things together, they are really good.
Yeah - that's pretty much the thing with buff heavy characters/groups. It's not about any single buff, it's about stacking them together until the bonuses are stupidly high.
For example - a bard's Inspire Courage is handy, but it really comes into it's own when the bard casts Heroism on the martial characters before the fight, and then in the first round starts singing and casts Haste (all doable by level 7). Between them is +5 to hit, +1 AC, +2 to all saves, +2 damage, an extra attack/round, and multiple other lesser buffs mixed in.
The Inquisitor & Warpriest are both buff characters - but most of their buffs are focused inward, and they can do them quickly to start stacking them fast.
Some classes don't work well with some playstyles and some campaign styles. They are classes with lots of moving parts. If you are good at managing them and making them work to what you want, they can be great. If you're the type of guy who looks at their sheet and says, "I've been able to that all along?", then these classes aren't for you.
Inquisitors are not mean to be all-day blasters. They have many types of tricks, and most of those tricks stack. If you know there's one encounter and have prep time, a mid-level or higher inquisitor can nova pretty hard. If you know that it's going to be a long day, you can parcel out the gifts. A judgment here, a spell there, bane somewhere else.
They get big bonuses to two social skills and monster knowledge. On top of 6+int skill points.
You don't get the domain spells, but the powers are cool little additions. Some of them are very amazing. "I've been grabbed? I'll just slip myself free without a check." "Oh, let's see what's on the other side of this door." "Bonus movement without being a monk or barbarian? Yes please."
Warpriests aren't my style, so I haven't looked at them as much. Still, I don't see a problem with them. The weapon damage bonus means that you can actually choose the weapons that nobody uses. You get some spells, some buffs, swift action self-healing, bonus feats. Yes, if you take one of the standard weapons you don't get extra damage at lower levels. Boo hoo, you're using a high-damage weapon.
Personally I love the Sacred weapon ability since it make crit builds scarey.
For the weapons, the ones with Large Crit Ranges tend to either be exotics or have low dice damage (ala scimitar). This is to balance out the weapon since large dice damage + large crit range tends to get nasty.
But now you can run around with a 2d6 15-20 scimitar? that sounds nice... or a pair of kukri's with the nasty crit feats since you get all those bonus feats :P
I see the Inquisitor as the divine counterpart for the Bard, while the Warpriest is that for the Magus.
As of lately I'm thinking to make a general table about which caster is foil to which
To be fair, the cleric is one of the most overpowered classes in the game simply because of the amount of perks they get. They're good fighters, can wear medium armor, can cast 9-level spells, can cast any spell on their class's spell list, gain domains to help round themselves out, and they're one of the best healers in the game. Lack of bonus feats and poor skills (common for 9-level spellcasters) are their only meaningful weaknesses. So comparing the inquisitor and warpriest to the cleric is not entirely fair. Losing the cleric's spellcasting will always feel underwhelming.
It should be noted that the playtest version of the warpriest was balanced using the cleric as a benchmark. The mindset was "Okay, the cleric has 3/4 BAB and 9-level spellcasting. If we let them have a pseudo-full BAB and 6-level spellcasting, that should result in a balanced class, right?" This resulted in the warpriest becoming really overpowered, even though I do admit I was not pleased with the final result.
To be fair, the cleric is one of the most overpowered classes in the game simply because of the amount of perks they get. They're good fighters, can wear medium armor, can cast 9-level spells, can cast any spell on their class's spell list, gain domains to help round themselves out, and they're one of the best healers in the game. Lack of bonus feats and poor skills (common for 9-level spellcasters) are their only meaningful weaknesses. So comparing the inquisitor and warpriest to the cleric is not entirely fair. Losing the cleric's spellcasting will always feel underwhelming.
It should be noted that the playtest version of the warpriest was balanced using the cleric as a benchmark. The mindset was "Okay, the cleric has 3/4 BAB and 9-level spellcasting. If we let them have a pseudo-full BAB and 6-level spellcasting, that should result in a balanced class, right?" This resulted in the warpriest becoming really overpowered, even though I do admit I was not pleased with the final result.
Your definition of "really overpowered" is "weaker then the actually overpowered class that Warpriest is based on"? Curious. If you were looking for a better then Cleric class, I recommend the Shaman.
Tack on the crit feats late game and it gets funny lol
Your definition of "really overpowered" is "weaker then the actually overpowered class that Warpriest is based on"? Curious. If you were looking for a better then Cleric class, I recommend the Shaman.To be fair, the cleric is one of the most overpowered classes in the game simply because of the amount of perks they get. They're good fighters, can wear medium armor, can cast 9-level spells, can cast any spell on their class's spell list, gain domains to help round themselves out, and they're one of the best healers in the game. Lack of bonus feats and poor skills (common for 9-level spellcasters) are their only meaningful weaknesses. So comparing the inquisitor and warpriest to the cleric is not entirely fair. Losing the cleric's spellcasting will always feel underwhelming.
It should be noted that the playtest version of the warpriest was balanced using the cleric as a benchmark. The mindset was "Okay, the cleric has 3/4 BAB and 9-level spellcasting. If we let them have a pseudo-full BAB and 6-level spellcasting, that should result in a balanced class, right?" This resulted in the warpriest becoming really overpowered, even though I do admit I was not pleased with the final result.
Balance and game design is more complicated than that. The playtest warpriest was fine compared to the cleric, but overpowered compared to other classes because it was essentially a full BAB class with 6-level prepared spellcasting from the best divine spell list and rather decent bonus feat progression.
Also, my point is that inquisitor and warpriest likely feel underwhelming to the OP because he's used to playing clerics, one of the most powerful classes in the game and in most editions in D&D.
Inquisitors are awesome. Personally, I think they're one of the most balanced and interesting classes Pathfinder has. They kind of fall in that sweet spot that Bards, Rangers, Paladins, and Alchemists are in (Investigators too, arguably) where they have a lot to play around with and are really pretty good at what they do without being ridiculous at it, or without giving up whole swathes of other things in order to be good. Incidentally they're also all partial spellcasting classes...
Warpriests are decent, they just are taxed so heavily by the action economy that at a certain point it's more effective to just play a cleric.
Another personal problem with the warpriest is that it has way too many pools to keep track of. You have a pool of blessings, fervor, sacred weapon and sacred armor all to keep track of. This is in addition to the spells. It's just a lot of bookwork.
The only major problem with the warpriest is that so much of what it can do relies on the same limited action.I agree with this. The limitation that just about everything takes a swift action makes it hard to stack stuff.
I heavily regret this as well.
The new AE system is actually right up the Warpriest's alley (and maybe the Inquisitor's too). Allows you to go Full-Vultron in one turn
The only major problem with the warpriest is that so much of what it can do relies on the same limited action.I agree with this. The limitation that just about everything takes a swift action makes it hard to stack stuff.I heavily regret this as well.
The new AE system is actually right up the Warpriest's alley (and maybe the Inquisitor's too). Allows you to go Full-Vultron in one turn
If one or more of the abilities were instead Move or Free, or there were Feats that could change them to Move or Free (Quicken Blessing just makes another Swift Action), those options would be very appreciated.
Also, it's odd that there are no Feats for Extra Blessings, Extra Fervor, or Extra Sacred Weapon usages, either. Pretty much every other x-times-per-day class ability out there has Feats that increase the available usage pool.
I'm afraid that goes back to my earlier complaint that the warpriest just has too many pools. It raises the question of "Which pool gets the feat and do you really want to have 4 separate Extra-X feats for the same class?"
|
I think the Warpriest's Blessings should have been 10+lvl+wis mod.
I think Sacred Weapon should be minutes per level.
I think Fervor should have been lvl+wis mod.
I think Sacred Armor should have come at an earlier level and that it should have been a Sacred or Profane bonus(depending on alignment and how you channel) instead of an Enhancement bonus(just a flavor thing.)
I think the Warpriest should have been able to count his level as Fighter levels for all feats instead of just his Bonus Feats.
I do agree with Saldiven that they should have more feats available to them for their class abilities.
|
|
Also, my point is that inquisitor and warpriest likely feel underwhelming to the OP because he's used to playing clerics, one of the most powerful classes in the game and in most editions in D&D.
Remember that I was not comparing the power level of Inq/WrPr to Cleric.
I only mention Clerics because they are the basic chassis for Inq and WrPr.
To me neither class is very intuitive. It has a jumble of parts, all 'meh' for the most part...unless you work hard at getting them to a point where they can work together.
I played an Inq a few years ago in a Shackled City campaign...he was later eaten by a mimic, but I digress. I thought that he would be fun...good skill points, decent combat, judgments...I was happy with the skills, the combat was enough to keep him relevant in a fight...the judgments were a disappointment.
The idea is that it is a great boost if you save it for the BBEG...really? That to me just seems like a poor ability.
Now don't get me wrong. I think the smite of a Paladin sucks becasue it is of such a limited usage. Thus when I do play a paladin I take the archetype that allows a swap of LoH for Smites. Even still, the Smites are much stronger than the judgments.
So I says to myself, Self, you don't like these classes, but others do. Why is that? I should ask and maybe find a new viewpoint.
I wouldn't say the inquisitor was much based on the cleric "chasis". He takes a lot from the bard in my opinion. Skills and spells like a bard. Judgement is like a paladin's smite had a baby with a bard's song. And then a few tricks of its own, like solo tactics. The only thing it really gets from cleric is a few spells and a domain.
But on to the other point, Pathfinder is a game with classes that are sprinters and classes that are marathoners. Some classes have big limited use abilities and some classes can do their big stuff almost all day. So essentially, you seem to be saying you don't like the big limited ability based classes. And that's fine. You don't have to play those classes, though there are a lot of them.
If you don't like the inquisitor, then I'm curious how you feel about the bard. Or barbarians, as their rage can be quite limited until later levels.
|
I guess a good first step to analyze why you don't particularly care for these types of classes would be to get insight into what types of games you play.
1) Are they usually homebrew or published? If published, does the GM tinker with it at all or just run as written?
2) What are the favorite classes at the table? For instance, is it always a 50/50 shot that someone plays a fighter? Do you personally frequently get shoehorned into a specific role?
3) What is the social/exploration/combat ratio of these games?
4) What is the game "feel"? Is it realistic and gritty, fantastic and heroic, beer-and-pretzels silly, etc?
5) What level range do you normally play? Do games always start at 1? Do they ever get much past 12?
6) Do full casters run the game, or do the martials carry the team with the casters playing support?
7) What sort of wealth progression do you normally see? Is it approximately by the WBL chart? Are you free to buy any magic items you want or do you have to fish around for gear?
8) Are there any specific houserules your group uses or do you stay 99% RAW/RAI?
Another personal problem with the warpriest is that it has way too many pools to keep track of. You have a pool of blessings, fervor, sacred weapon and sacred armor all to keep track of. This is in addition to the spells. It's just a lot of bookwork.
Yeah, the warpriest is a cool class, but it does suffer some design issues. One of these days, I'd like to homebrew a fix for them.
|
|
Remember that I was not comparing the power level of Inq/WrPr to Cleric.
Good.
I only mention Clerics because they are the basic chassis for Inq and WrPr.
What? No they aren't. No more than Sorcerer is the basis for the Bard Chassis, or Wizard the basis for the Magus.
To me neither class is very intuitive. It has a jumble of parts, all 'meh' for the most part...unless you work hard at getting them to a point where they can work together.
This is somewhat true of Warpriest...but not at all of Inquisitor. Inquisitor requires almost no effort to get their abilities working in synch, you just do it.
I played an Inq a few years ago in a Shackled City campaign...he was later eaten by a mimic, but I digress. I thought that he would be fun...good skill points, decent combat, judgments...I was happy with the skills, the combat was enough to keep him relevant in a fight...the judgments were a disappointment.
What level did you play to? Judgments start off a bit weak, but get a lot stronger by 5th-6th level. And especially at 8th with Second Judgment. And prior to around those levels, your casting is almost as good as an Oracle, so your Judgments being weak isn't the end of the world...plus you get Bane at 5th, which is amazing.
The idea is that it is a great boost if you save it for the BBEG...really? That to me just seems like a poor ability.
It lasts the whole fight. That's two fights a day as early as 4th level, so half your fights, three and most of your fights by 7th, and all your fights by 10th, going by the '4 fights a day' paradigm.
Now don't get me wrong. I think the smite of a Paladin sucks becasue it is of such a limited usage. Thus when I do play a paladin I take the archetype that allows a swap of LoH for Smites. Even still, the Smites are much stronger than the judgments.
Remember, unlike Smite Evil, Judgment lasts a whole fight no matter how many foes you fight, and works on any and all targets.
Also...if you dislike limited use abilities, there's always the Sanctified Slayer, which replaces Judgments with Studied Target and some Sneak Attack. That might suit your playstyle better...though I'll note that people don't generally regard it as a straight upgrade.
So I says to myself, Self, you don't like these classes, but others do. Why is that? I should ask and maybe find a new viewpoint.
You appear to either overvalue unlimited use abilities, or play in games that involve way more fights per day than is expected or usual in Pathfinder. You may also be expecting abilities to come into play too early.
Remember, as compared to a Full BAB Class, the Inquisitor is only 1 BAB and a few HP behind a Full BAB character until 5th level, and have pretty good spellcasting. And at 5th level, when the BAB difference becomes meaningful, they get Bane, as well as a number of upgraded Judgments.
|
|
I wouldn't say the inquisitor was much based on the cleric "chasis". He takes a lot from the bard in my opinion. Skills and spells like a bard. Judgement is like a paladin's smite had a baby with a bard's song. And then a few tricks of its own, like solo tactics. The only thing it really gets from cleric is a few spells and a domain.
Divine class, caster, same BAB same good saves, one goes directly off same spell list the other is a bit more modified but still mostly the cleric list intact.
Not all abilities are directly from the cleric...that is why it is a chassis. It is a base...and builds up from it.
Not good, not bad, nor right or wrong.
But on to the other point, Pathfinder is a game with classes that are sprinters and classes that are marathoners. Some classes have big limited use abilities and some classes can do their big stuff almost all day. So essentially, you seem to be saying you don't like the big limited ability based classes. And that's fine. You don't have to play those classes, though there are a lot of them.
What I think I am saying is that I like Divine classes..but for some reason, as much as I try and use these classes and hope to build a PC I like it just seems a jumble of 'blech'
I am not a fan of the Magus nor the Arcanist...but have never been one to play Arcane casters so I was not wondering about why with them.
But with these classes I want to like them..they should be sitting right in my wheelhouse of class enjoyment.
But I don't...and I wanted to try and see what other see to gain a new viewpoint.
If you don't like the inquisitor, then I'm curious how you feel about the bard. Or barbarians, as their rage can be quite limited until later levels.
Bards. They are 'aiight'. I never play a bard...or so rarely that it really doesn't count. They also have that 'jumble' of abilities, but I see more of a...focus?
Barbarians. Rage is there from the start and can last through a few encounters if you need it.
I equate rage with Bane in a way..I had a poor opinion with Bane, but knowing that you can invest in it to increase how much you can use it improves it in my eyes. 1 feat, a decent Con and 3 levels and you can rage 3+ encounters. Easily do the same for Performance with the Bard. Can you do that with Judgments? A shame you cannot.
|
Gee, I find move up, cast shield of faith, swift cast divine favor(fate's favor) and have an arcane type cast enlarge person on me works really great.
At 6th level, that's a size increase to damage, +3 AC, +3H, +3D in one round.
Second round, move up, activate destruction (+3 D) and furious focus power attack. If i'm lucky, that will be a charge.
so on the second round,
I'm +3 AC (28 total), at +14 hit and doing 3d6 + 22.
I find warpriest pretty good.
I played an Inquisitor up to 11th and a Warpriest now to 14th.
I cannot conceive of a cleric build that would be able to defeat an equal level Inquisitor in combat. I'm sure it can be done? Maybe someday someone will make up a comparison of each build: same race, same god perhaps.
As for the Warpriest they are adequate at lower levels, but once you hit 10th with Quicken Blessing they are crazy dangerous. Suddenly in one round you can have two Dire Tigers (with celestial template) charging from flank at the lich across the room. Oh, and are you down to single digit hit points and with ability damage to boot? Perhaps a swift action Heal and then a full attack will do the job in the same round. At the appropriate level for the spells, of course.
A sword/board dwarven Warpriest tank with a high crit weapon will slowly destroy everything in the room. It's like the hallway fight from Oldboy...
|
|
I only mention Clerics because they are the basic chassis for Inq and WrPr.What? No they aren't. No more than Sorcerer is the basis for the Bard Chassis, or Wizard the basis for the Magus.
I have explained an answer to this though that people have taken slight to what I said is interesting.
And yes, I would say that Wiz and Magus would have a more common chassis than I would say Sor and Bard.
To me neither class is very intuitive. It has a jumble of parts, all 'meh' for the most part...unless you work hard at getting them to a point where they can work together.This is somewhat true of Warpriest...but not at all of Inquisitor. Inquisitor requires almost no effort to get their abilities working in synch, you just do it.
I guess congrats on you. I have not found that the 'pieces just fit'.
I played an Inq a few years ago in a Shackled City campaign...he was later eaten by a mimic, but I digress. I thought that he would be fun...good skill points, decent combat, judgments...I was happy with the skills, the combat was enough to keep him relevant in a fight...the judgments were a disappointment.What level did you play to? Judgments start off a bit weak, but get a lot stronger by 5th-6th level. And especially at 8th with Second Judgment. And prior to around those levels, your casting is almost as good as an Oracle, so your Judgments being weak isn't the end of the world...plus you get Bane at 5th, which is amazing..
Cannot remember exactly what level he became a mimic-meal...though 4-6 area.
I do remember that always wanting to hold onto the judgement for a big fight which never materialized...or using it and feeling it was lack-luster.
Bane is a good ability...for 5 rounds a day to start. That duration is a letdown to me.
As for casting...well it is magic...King of the Hill. That comes down to spell known selection in regards to how potent of a caster you are.
The idea is that it is a great boost if you save it for the BBEG...really? That to me just seems like a poor ability.It lasts the whole fight. That's two fights a day as early as 4th level, so half your fights, three and most of your fights by 7th, and all your fights by 10th, going by the '4 fights a day' paradigm..
So 2/3rds of your adventuring career to get to the point where it is basically an always on ability.
The Alchemist get his mutagen that is 10 minutes per level and gives a more powerful effect. And he can brew another with a bit of time so he can blow his wad again in the same day.
I can talk about how Grit and Panache are super limited...but renewable.
Now don't get me wrong. I think the smite of a Paladin sucks becasue it is of such a limited usage. Thus when I do play a paladin I take the archetype that allows a swap of LoH for Smites. Even still, the Smites are much stronger than the judgments.Remember, unlike Smite Evil, Judgment lasts a whole fight no matter how many foes you fight, and works on any and all targets.
Also...if you dislike limited use abilities, there's always the Sanctified Slayer, which replaces Judgments with Studied Target and some Sneak Attack. That might suit your playstyle better...though I'll note that people don't generally regard it as a straight upgrade.
And it is fairly weak. So who loses in the battle of red-headed step child?
Paladins do what they do very well...go after teh BBEG...emphasis on E. Inq on the otherhand want to nickel and dime everyone.
When I do look again I do tend to look at the Sanctified Slayer...and do move on again.
You appear to either overvalue unlimited use abilities, or play in games that involve way more fights per day than is expected or usual in Pathfinder. You may also be expecting abilities to come into play too early.Remember, as compared to a Full BAB Class, the Inquisitor is only 1 BAB and a few HP behind a Full BAB character until 5th level, and have pretty good spellcasting. And at 5th level, when the BAB difference becomes meaningful, they get Bane, as well as a number of upgraded Judgments.
You may be right. Maybe I just expect too much from them.
As I have said before I want to like these classes...there is just 'je ne sais quoi'.
|
|
I played an Inquisitor up to 11th and a Warpriest now to 14th.
I cannot conceive of a cleric build that would be able to defeat an equal level Inquisitor in combat. I'm sure it can be done? Maybe someday someone will make up a comparison of each build: same race, same god perhaps.
As for the Warpriest they are adequate at lower levels, but once you hit 10th with Quicken Blessing they are crazy dangerous. Suddenly in one round you can have two Dire Tigers (with celestial template) charging from flank at the lich across the room. Oh, and are you down to single digit hit points and with ability damage to boot? Perhaps a swift action Heal and then a full attack will do the job in the same round. At the appropriate level for the spells, of course.
A sword/board dwarven Warpriest tank with a high crit weapon will slowly destroy everything in the room. It's like the hallway fight from Oldboy...
My understanding was the swift casting using fervor requires the spell to target the warpriest. Summons don't do that. Maybe I read it wrong.
Though Fervor is a good ability.