| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’m still really surprised to not see them in the APG. Isn’t the Iconic one of the most popular, too?
|
Imrijka is best Iconic yes.
The reasons given are: Witch and Oracle are the most popular, we have urban adventures coming up so Investigator made too much sense (plus more alchemy stuff), and Swashbuckler (and this is just speculation on my part) with the new Action system they probably had ideas on how they wanted to redo it and wanted to strike while it was hot in their heads. Also again, urban adventures.
Though they could combine Inquisitor with Investigator or Cleric as paths, since 6th level casters aren't a thing anymore, with the way enemy types work Bane would need to be overhauled, and Judgements need to be overhauled too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think a Ranger with Cleric Dedication feats fills the same kind of flavour space as the Inquisitor. Unless it's the PF 1e mechanics in specific you want.
A hunter focused on tracking down enemies with some divine flavour and powers.
Yeah I never had anyone play an inquisitor in my games and never had much interest myself what is it that makes an inquisitor an inquisitor?
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
From a gameplay standpoint it was all the the things they got and the versatility, they weren't super specialized but it was easy to fit them into any role, tank, damage, healer, skills.
Plus the thematic skill boosts and abilities, like Bane vs whatever you wanted + unique spell list.
Out of mechanics I'd say divine tracker/assassin/investigator.
It will be interesting if the new version has no spells
I have suggested before that many of the iconic abilities need significant change as they were numerical buffs that are a combination of no longer necessary and potentially unbalancing given how much impact +1s apparently have
So it will be interesting to see
I assume that the next full classes won’t appear until August 2021
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Inquisitor was one of my favorite classes, but this was because of its mechanical strengths, not flavor.
The mechanics of the class does not translate well into PF2, so if it is remade as a class for PF2 (instead of just being done via multiclass) I wouldn't actually expect it to be a class people love as much. Because what people loved was how powerful he class was, in my measure of things.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Inquisitor would, IMO, make for a good cleric doctrine.
Inquisitor was one of my favorite classes, but this was because of its mechanical strengths, not flavor.
The mechanics of the class does not translate well into PF2, so if it is remade as a class for PF2 (instead of just being done via multiclass) I wouldn't actually expect it to be a class people love as much. Because what people loved was how powerful he class was, in my measure of things.
Yes you see a lot of inquisitor builds playing on bane and judgement for high dps - especially archers. I would not expect anything like the same thing in the new system
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
inquisitor is one of those classes to me, that would work better as a cleric doctrine, than a separate class.
If it shows up as a cleric doctrine or earliest class archetype (both could work IMO) it could still be in the APG, just not as a class. Give a judgement feat, bane feat, and some extra skills, maybe take some weapon and armor stuff away.
|
From a gameplay standpoint it was all the the things they got and the versatility, they weren't super specialized but it was easy to fit them into any role, tank, damage, healer, skills.
Plus the thematic skill boosts and abilities, like Bane vs whatever you wanted + unique spell list.
Out of mechanics I'd say divine tracker/assassin/investigator.
Just out of curiosity, How would you build an inquisitor as a healer? I know they can cast the "cure" series, but I don't feel like there is anything that actually makes them good at healing.
Just out of curiosity, How would you build an inquisitor as a healer? I know they can cast the "cure" series, but I don't feel like there is anything that actually makes them good at healing.From a gameplay standpoint it was all the the things they got and the versatility, they weren't super specialized but it was easy to fit them into any role, tank, damage, healer, skills.
Plus the thematic skill boosts and abilities, like Bane vs whatever you wanted + unique spell list.
Out of mechanics I'd say divine tracker/assassin/investigator.
Inquisitor have several status removal spells, can cast the cure spells and Heal.
That's basically all a healer needs.
There are some niche "healing focused" builds, but none of them we're clerics. As far as I recall, they basically all relied on Life Link actually. Healing isn't really a specialty, and most groups got by using a wand of cure light wounds in between combats. Aside from that you just need access to status removal spells.
|
|
Just out of curiosity, How would you build an inquisitor as a healer? I know they can cast the "cure" series, but I don't feel like there is anything that actually makes them good at healing.From a gameplay standpoint it was all the the things they got and the versatility, they weren't super specialized but it was easy to fit them into any role, tank, damage, healer, skills.
Plus the thematic skill boosts and abilities, like Bane vs whatever you wanted + unique spell list.
Out of mechanics I'd say divine tracker/assassin/investigator.
Inquisitor have several status removal spells, can cast the cure spells and Heal.
That's basically all a healer needs.
There are some niche "healing focused" builds, but none of them we're clerics. As far as I recall, they basically all relied on Life Link actually. Healing isn't really a specialty, and most groups got by using a wand of cure light wounds in between combats. Aside from that you just need access to status removal spells.
This. Plus they have Domains and Inquisitions that can buff their healing aspects as well.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmm what if instead of a Cleric doctrine it was a Rogue racket that gave focus spells, let you pick wisdom as your primary stat, and other feats gave more supernatural/magic abilities.
it could just be me and the fact that when I did play a Inquisitor i tended to pick the one the one that traded out judgement for sneak attack since in pf1 I tended to prefer passive abilities. But I feel like that is another potential design space.
I could also see it as a cleric doctrine or it's own class as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Original Inquisitor was basically a Divine bard that focused on buff/debuff auras (instead of performance), bane(extra damage on chosen type), solo tactics (teamwork feat use without other trained team members) and light divine spellcasting.
Honestly, Bane like ability would be a little reminiscent of the Precision Hunters's edge. Solo tactics seemed tied to getting people more interested in using/choosing teamwork feats. I'm not certain it was truly integral to the class concept, not that I didn't enjoy using it.
With rules as they exist, you might be able to make an Inquisitor with a Ranger multi-classed either into one of Bard, Sorcerer, or Cleric. Alternately a warpriest might work save for aspects to which Inquisitors were not as tightly held to some of the finer 'details' of their deities anathema.
If they come out as a new class, my guess would be they would focus on buff/debuff abilities. Something personal like Bane-like bonuses to damage, or Judgments that would be produce aura effects. They might introduce a spellcasting progression similar to a form of automatic divine multi-class progression. (two cantrips and one spell per day) Judgements might be implemented as one or more of the following: a new form of divine cantrip with a Judgement trait; or they might be their focus spells; or a divine font class ability. Any of these generally producing these Judgement buff/debuff aura abilities.
As for other potential future implementations, it might work as:
a new Doctrine for Cleric (potentially relaxed anathema, divine font changed from healing/damaging to a buff/debuff aura)
a Justice, Judgement, Vengeance, Inquisition and/or Execution collection of Muses for Bard (which might be an example of a class archetype, that might switch their spellcasting to divine)
a prestige archetype for ranger that grants a weak anathema and light spellcasting capabilities, landing one somewhere between a multi-classed cleric and divine sorcerer.
The new Investigator might also be a viable base class, potentially being a starting class, and inquisitor might be able to be a Path, or might be a base class that one takes an multi-class or prestige archetype to get access to the expected supernatural abilities.
Actually the thought of an Investigator or Ranger both being potential roots to a start of a prestige class seems and interesting concept to me.
edit: That was an Interesting idea PixieRose: Inquisitor being a Rogue Racket. I hadn't considered that, but it has an interesting ring to it, and some decent potential.
|
Hmmm what if instead of a Cleric doctrine it was a Rogue racket that gave focus spells, let you pick wisdom as your primary stat, and other feats gave more supernatural/magic abilities.
it could just be me and the fact that when I did play a Inquisitor i tended to pick the one the one that traded out judgement for sneak attack since in pf1 I tended to prefer passive abilities. But I feel like that is another potential design space.
I could also see it as a cleric doctrine or it's own class as well.
I remember a homebrew 5e D&D Rogue "Roguish Archetype" called something like "Avenger" or something that functioned similarly: basically a divine spellcasting version of the Core Arcane Trickster, and honestly what went through my head was "Why not just call this an Inquisitor archetype?" Great minds think alike!
Personally, I feel like it shouldn't be a cleric doctrine. If it was, there wouldn't be too much to differentiate it thematically from the warpriest doctrine; being a more martial type of priest is a similar niche if it's collapsed into the same class.
But...what if it was a full class with focus casting instead of spells, with a reworked version of their bane and the like? It'd probably need some tweaks to differentiate it from the paladin, but I feel like that's doable.
Although the notion of an inquisitor archetype is kind of interesting too. It'd be neat to be able to make an inquisitor rogue of Calistria or an inquisitor wizard of Nethys. (But with how multi-classing works now, you might be able to do that anyway if it was a full class.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I feel like it shouldn't be a cleric doctrine. If it was, there wouldn't be too much to differentiate it thematically from the warpriest doctrine; being a more martial type of priest is a similar niche if it's collapsed into the same class.
But...what if it was a full class with focus casting instead of spells, with a reworked version of their bane and the like? It'd probably need some tweaks to differentiate it from the paladin, but I feel like that's doable.
Although the notion of an inquisitor archetype is kind of interesting too. It'd be neat to be able to make an inquisitor rogue of Calistria or an inquisitor wizard of Nethys. (But with how multi-classing works now, you might be able to do that anyway if it was a full class.)
Your point on archetype / class archetypes always seems to be the fine line in discussion. Since every class can take a multiclass archetype what distinguishes whether something is a class that can be taken as such or just an archetype? It is interesting. Cavalier seemed to fall into the latter part . Although realistically I would like the chassis to make some kind of return and have the *mount* part be the general archetype - since I always liked orders and teamwork feats would now probably be team buffs of some kind perhaps through focus points
On inquisitor I think as a cleric doctrine it would be the “rogue” cleric with warpriest as the “fighter” and presumably cloistered as the “wizard”. Perhaps cloistered is supposed to be the “cleric” cleric but with no armour and legendary casting it definitely seems akin to divine wizard
But it also fits as divine ranger or rogue as well...
I can’t decide if it would be better as a cleric doctrine or champion cause. Or maybe a champion archetype.
I can’t decide if it would be better as a cleric doctrine or champion cause. Or maybe a champion archetype.
It might be a fitting cause for one of the Champions of Law if/when they appear.
I could see the Inqui as an subclasd-path for Rogue, Ranger and Investigator or Champion cause. Even as a Cleric doctrine with relaxed anathema.
As others said, the class is nice because it's very good mechanically - not because it has a single defined theme.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They'll come when you don't expect them to.
Oracle was popular enough to have some brief consideration as the twelfth CRB class. Given that, it was a shoe-in for the APG. Once you've got a divine class, it doesn't really make sense to have divine classes occupying 50% of the APG classes.
Inquisitor was always on my shortlist of classes to consider for various builds.
Like others have said, I can see it being linked to Rogues, Rangers, Clerics, and Paladins, and that alone indicates it could be a good candidate for a stand-alone class.
It could also be a universal archetype that grants any of those classes some spells, focus powers, thematic stuff, and bane features. I definitely would like to see archetypes which play with spell lists, and this could be a good one. Adding certain key spells to the Divine list could make an inquisitor archetyped cleric really unique.
The thing I can't wrap my head around is why Investigator beat Inquisitor to release...
Instead of being super bitter I guess I'll just say I hope they come back soon too, whether that's in the form of a Cleric Doctrine or a Champion/Ranger Class Path or Archetype, I hope they return soon.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thing I can't wrap my head around is why Investigator beat Inquisitor to release...Because of the urban AP that's launching alongside it, and since Oracle was in as well they didn't want to do two Divine classes. Plus more Alchemical stuff.
Not only urban, but one where you literally play police officers in Absalom. Including the Investigator before they do the actual detective story AP seems like kind of a must.
Not only urban, but one where you literally play police officers in Absalom. Including the Investigator before they do the actual detective story AP seems like kind of a must.The thing I can't wrap my head around is why Investigator beat Inquisitor to release...Because of the urban AP that's launching alongside it, and since Oracle was in as well they didn't want to do two Divine classes. Plus more Alchemical stuff.
Maybe it'll be enough to get someone to pick that class. It was one of the most unpopular of all in my opinion since it was very janky and had small impact on Combat situations (Pretty much unavoidbale in APs/PFS).
Not sure it'll be worth it in the long term unless it comes out awesome this time around. If it's anything like before it would fade into obscurity as soon as that AP stops being relevant.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
PF1 Investigator was one of the more dangerous melee combatants around among 6 level casters if used properly (definitely behind Magus, and maybe a tad behind Warpriest and super-optimized Beastmorph Vivisectionists, but on par with Inquisitor). Adding 1/2 level to attack and damage on a class focused on self-buff spells is no joke. And I say this having played one from 1st to 10th level.
If you think they weren't good in combat, you never saw an actual combat Investigator in play.
But really, all that is meaningless in PF2. The Rogue was pretty awful in PF1 on a mechanical level, but the PF2 Rogue is great. How good a PF2 Class is mechanically has little or nothing to do with how good it was in PF1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If they expand the alchemical "magic" system on that premise, I could see it having it's place, but I'd hate for it to outshine the Alchemist given the issues it has on release.
I mean if they do a good job, pairing it with the AP could make a huge hit!
Or it could be shoving a class down people's throats in hopes that it catches on.
I would argue a true gish is sorely needed in the APG, but then maybe Class Archetypes are going to solve the problem there.
Just a personal thing, but I’d also like the gish classes to get a little extra time. Better establishing more casters and martials before tossing in a full blend seems like it can only help.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just a personal thing, but I’d also like the gish classes to get a little extra time. Better establishing more casters and martials before tossing in a full blend seems like it can only help.
I mean the gish classes released in the APG before, since Inquisitor and Summoner were in there (as well as Alchemist).
If you want to count Bard (and I would) that means they existed in Core PF1. And the matter isn't that a "full blend" doesn't exist, it's that a full blend class doesn't exist.
Not to mention Champion/Ranger being stripped of spells reducing true gishes down to pretty much only MCD gishes.
Even if you only counted six-level caster classes there was a lot:
Bard, Alchemist, Inquisitor, Magus, Warpriest, Summoner, Mesmerist, Occultist, Spiritualist, Skald, Hunter, Investigator, and Vigilante (if you count their archetypes)
Add in the old four-level casters:
Ranger, Paladin, Bloodrager, Medium, and Vampire Hunter (I'd prolly not count this one, but hey why leave it out).
In PF1, there are 10(11) total Martial only classes. There are 8 full casters. (11 if you count Vigilante)
There are 12 6th level caster classes, 13 if you count Vigilante.
There are 5 more 4th level partials.
Now again, if Archetypes deal with it in the APG, then alright, but depending on where you want to count Vigilante it's 50% even split on the partial casting vs. Full+None Classes.
To me, that's more than enough justification for something.