Insinuator AntiPaladin from Agents of Evil: What's the general consensus?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion


Personally I really like the flavour and the fact that the Code of Conduct is loosened a bit from "Must be a raging loon" to "Ultimate Selfcentred Sod". Gives me a bit more wiggle room for motivations.

And the ability to, usually, change which patron it uses each day is great for confusing players expectations.

Switching out the spells for fighter feats is a bit of a painful pinch.

So what do you all think about it?


Good idea, interesting idea. Slapped by being weaker than either Paladin or Antipaladin for no reason. Still no Chelaxian paladin/antipaladin, still the place they make the most sense to be.

Silver Crusade Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like it plenty. ^_^

While I'd like a true first-party Black Knight, between Hellknights, sentinels of Asmodeus, insinuators who simply elect to focus on Asmodeus, and just plain ol' fighters and cavaliers and warpriests... I'll get by.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The spell switch is fine. Antipaladin is mostly spending spells on minor buffs or having enemies succeed on their saves. The fighter feats will probably be close in terms of utility.

The swift healing is great. And the look on your allies' faces when you smite an elemental? Priceless.


It's weaker in some respect that a paladin or antipaladin, but it does get the ability to change what it can smite on a daily basis (basically anything but evil).

Losing spells hurts some, but spells were never the mainstay. It mostly the loss of use of wands that hurts more than anything.

The extra feats really helps you pull of fighting style which require a lot of feats.

I think it's pretty fluffy archetype, and I plan to play one in Hell's Vengeance campaign that my group will run soon.

I think the thing I lament the most is the loss of cruelties to hit the enemy with, especially with a conductive weapon :(

That said you can now use fey-foundling and make yourself a very effective tank. I will probably build to take dazzling display and some other intimidate based feats.


You can smite evil, actually. Just get a neutral patron for the day. The only alignment you can't smite is your own.


QuidEst wrote:
You can smite evil, actually. Just get a neutral patron for the day. The only alignment you can't smite is your own.

Good point, but still not quite correct. You can't smite the alignment of whatever outsider your have aligned with for the day, or more accurately anyone who shares any part of the alignment of the outsider you've contracted with.

A NN outsider contracted by a NE character allows one to smite anyone without a N composite to their alignment, so LG, CG, LE, and CE.

Though, because the outsider must be within 1 step of your alignment you'll never be able to smite your alignment.


Yes, that flexible Smite is brilliant if you know what you'll be facing for the day. And since it can use Diplomacy to invoke you can be party face and it will boost your chances of invoking the outsider you want.

How about those auras? I think Aura of Ambition is nice. Only a minor buff/debuff but it is untyped.


Another thing about the Insinuator that as GM I like. It can be adapted to non evil alignment and still works with only minimal tweaks.

(I had an idea for an order of knights that could be any partly neutral alignment, who prioritized their own self advancement. Sort of like the Cavalier Cockatrice order, who can even be good.)


I like the archetype a lot. A non-chaotic Antipaladin has been something that's been requested a lot. Trading the spells for bonus feats seems pretty reasonable too since the Antipaladin spells were never that great to begin with. A non-archetyped Antipaladin is probably better in terms of power but the Insinuator is much more functional as a PC.


I like it but not love it. The loss of spell list does not matter IMO since the anti paladin spell list is absolute crap. The question for me is rather or not this is a better archetype than the Dread Vanguard and for me it simply is not. That being said, my group always houserules anti paladins to be of any evil alignment so for others who have more restrictive GMs this Insinuator is a great option for a non CE player.


Claxon wrote:
QuidEst wrote:
You can smite evil, actually. Just get a neutral patron for the day. The only alignment you can't smite is your own.

Good point, but still not quite correct. You can't smite the alignment of whatever outsider your have aligned with for the day, or more accurately anyone who shares any part of the alignment of the outsider you've contracted with.

A NN outsider contracted by a NE character allows one to smite anyone without a N composite to their alignment, so LG, CG, LE, and CE.

Though, because the outsider must be within 1 step of your alignment you'll never be able to smite your alignment.

Unclear, my bad- what I meant to say was that the only alignment you can never smite is your own.

Dark Archive

I really kinda like it, although I wonder... do you HAVE to shun deities? I mean, is a deity an outsider or what?

Specifically, could my insinuator make a choice to dedicate herself to Calistria still, follow her code and always invoke her?


Zelda Marie Lupescu wrote:

I really kinda like it, although I wonder... do you HAVE to shun deities? I mean, is a deity an outsider or what?

Specifically, could my insinuator make a choice to dedicate herself to Calistria still, follow her code and always invoke her?

They usually don't tie themselves to a single deity because their thing is absolute self serving "using whatever works", which needs a certain level of flexibility.

Even more than other anti paladins the insinuator places his own desires and goals above anyone elses. Even gods.

So your insinuator can worship Calistria, it just won't be to the level of a standard antipaladin.


Yeah, they probably wouldn't tie themselves to one deity (based on fluff) because the whole implication is a level of pragmatism which precludes such extreme dedication to anything but their own self-service. It's a bit like the 3.5 prestige class which stole spells from deities. Thematically it probably doesn't make sense to actually worship any of them.

And deities aren't "outsiders" probably. I mean they are, but they are beyond outsiders and would probably have their own classification beyond it. Technically their isn't anything saying you must keep the fluff, or that you can't worship a deity...but it doesn't seem appropriate to me.


3rd ed pretty sure there were stats fir gods and they had the outsider type.


Goblin_Priest wrote:
3rd ed pretty sure there were stats fir gods and they had the outsider type.

And Paizo has specifically wanted gods not to have stats (they are unassailable by normal mortals) and are would probably not qualify as normal outsiders. It's a big purposeful divergence from 3.5.

Specifically because of the problem of "if you give it stats players will find a way to kill it". Paizo didn't want that sort of thing to be an option, or any exploits to appear for them. So they simply don't have stats.


The Mantis God is a lesser deity and his statblock calls him an outsider.

Though yeah, generally JJ is too protective of his gods to let players have a chance to merc them. So no stats.


swoosh wrote:

The Mantis God is a lesser deity and his statblock calls him an outsider.

Though yeah, generally JJ is too protective of his gods to let players have a chance to merc them. So no stats.

Where does he have stats listed from?

Edit: Found it. He has stats from Curse Of The Crimson Throne: Escape from Old Korvosa. Which was published in 2008. Before Pathfinder RPG existed. The core rule book was published in 2009. That book was written for 3.5 not Pathfinder.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
swoosh wrote:

The Mantis God is a lesser deity and his statblock calls him an outsider.

Though yeah, generally JJ is too protective of his gods to let players have a chance to merc them. So no stats.

Retconned to the avatar of a deity.


swoosh wrote:

The Mantis God is a lesser deity and his statblock calls him an outsider.

That was 3.5 to Pathfinder RPG transition stuff before they'd finalized a lot of the rules and metaphysics. The stat block has several violations of eventual finalized PRPG rules.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"What would an Objectivist Paladin be like?"

Insinuator Antipaladin.

"Wait, but they're evil!"

"Yes."


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Apparently people who want a non-chaotic antipaladin have been forgetting about the Tyrant archetype.

Sovereign Court

I like them a lot. Not for the players who want something simple to control though; for those, steer them to the Tyrant or Antipaladin.

This one basically fills the Neutral Evil niche and requires a bit more roleplay / player desire for complexity.

Dark Archive

Okay, the Tyrant is really simple but not bad... as for the Insinuator, I kinda like it as a selfish for herself first character, just I also kinda like the idea of a Calistrian Antipaladin... Like the antipaldin I am making myself, while I could make her Chaotic Evil, just not sure I really want to play that alignment... Never been very good at not being just plain psychopathic with them or else I end up not being chaotic but instead being neutral evil or Lawful evil instead.

Sovereign Court

Just play it like a Chaotic Neutral priest(ess) of Calistria and you'll be pretty close 90% of the time. Basically the Chaotic Evil ones go a little heavy on the melted wax when engaging in their holy duties... ;)

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Insinuator AntiPaladin from Agents of Evil: What's the general consensus? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.