hi i wanted to play a witchhunter character in 2e and someone told me thats what inquisitors do but that doenst exist currently. is paizo planning to make this class at one point for 2e?
Wasn't there something about Paizo focusing more on releasing new classes over porting over the old ones?
I don't really see what conceptual niche the inquisitor would be filling now the champion can be a wider variety of alignments and teamwork feats appear to be a thing of the past.
I could see it going the way of the cavalier though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Inquisitor is in a weird place. They had a really specific flavor and a really flexible set of mechanics. Their greatest strengths revolved around self buffing, which is much less of a thing now. They were divine casters but their spell list included a lot of what would now be occult spells. They had really strong skills, but so does every class now. And if course six level casters aren't a thing anymore.
In practice, they usually buffed themselves to martial levels and used spells out of combat for utility. Now? You could probably slap some spells on a ranger or barbarian and be most of the way there.
I'm really starting to think they will be an archetype. "Hunting down enemies of your church" is just such a specific flavor for a base class. Like, you could easily be a champion or cleric who does that... But you could also be a fighter.
It really is a very narrow flavor.
I think they could be a class archetype or an archetype. I can see some mechanics that could be attached to a 4 slot chassis, but I'm not sure it is enough on its own.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It really is a very narrow flavor.
I think they could be a class archetype or an archetype. I can see some mechanics that could be attached to a 4 slot chassis, but I'm not sure it is enough on its own.
I thought about them being a cleric doctrine, but... I just can't see full them as full casters considering their martial bent. They'd be closer to champions.
... Actually, does the CRB say champion causes have to be alignment based? Because an Inquisitor cause you can tag onto any deity seems kind of great.
It really is a very narrow flavor.
I think they could be a class archetype or an archetype. I can see some mechanics that could be attached to a 4 slot chassis, but I'm not sure it is enough on its own.
I thought about them being a cleric doctrine, but... I just can't see full them as full casters considering their martial bent. They'd be closer to champions.
... Actually, does the CRB say champion causes have to be alignment based? Because an Inquisitor cause you can tag onto any deity seems kind of great.
Interesting. Maybe Judgement could be the focus spell that the Inquisition Cause grants, instead of Lay on Hands for Good Champions or Touch of Corruption for Evil Champions?
Interesting. Maybe Judgement could be the focus spell that the Inquisition Cause grants, instead of Lay on Hands for Good Champions or Touch of Corruption for Evil Champions?It really is a very narrow flavor.
I think they could be a class archetype or an archetype. I can see some mechanics that could be attached to a 4 slot chassis, but I'm not sure it is enough on its own.
I thought about them being a cleric doctrine, but... I just can't see full them as full casters considering their martial bent. They'd be closer to champions.
... Actually, does the CRB say champion causes have to be alignment based? Because an Inquisitor cause you can tag onto any deity seems kind of great.
I was thinking something like that, yeah. Smite Evil is probably the closest thing we have to Judgement at the moment. That or Rage.
Champions don't really get the skill support, but you could handle that aspect pretty easy through an archetype. And sorcerer multiclass let's them get whatever spell list fits their concept best.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or coming from the other direction, how about Inquisitor as an Investigator methodology?
You'd become trained in religion, and get Student of the Cannon skill feat. You also get a skill feat called "Judgement" that allows you to use Religion to track an enemy of your faith, and can use Int instead of Wis to recall knowledge with Religion.
The level 4 upgrade deals 1d6 persistent aligned damage whenever you critically hit using Devise a Stratagem.
In general, I think Investigators would also benefit from a level 1 class feat that lets you prepare an innate cantrip each day (requiring trained in the associated tradition skill).
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
You'd become trained in religion, and get Student of the Cannon skill feat.
I don't think we'll get that until the gunslinger comes out. ;-)
More seriously, I really like the idea of making it a methodology.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Betting money it will be some kind of investigator offshoot.
I feel like "skills class- divine edition" could be a class or a class path or an archetype, just a matter of how they want to do it. It will probably be a big change from the PF1 inquisitor though.
Or coming from the other direction, how about Inquisitor as an Investigator methodology?
You'd become trained in religion, and get Student of the Cannon skill feat. You also get a skill feat called "Judgement" that allows you to use Religion to track an enemy of your faith, and can use Int instead of Wis to recall knowledge with Religion.
The level 4 upgrade deals 1d6 persistent aligned damage whenever you critically hit using Devise a Stratagem.
In general, I think Investigators would also benefit from a level 1 class feat that lets you prepare an innate cantrip each day (requiring trained in the associated tradition skill).
I actually think that would be pretty cool. There could even be some Investigator class feats that modify Devise a Stratagem that would give it benefits similar to the Judgements that a PF1 Inquisitor could get.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eldritch Trickster Rogue with one of the divine classes as the Trickster racket bonus feat?
|
I definitely think we'll see Inquisitor again, though I suspect as either a Focus Spell class like Champion, or maybe a partial caster like the playtest Magus and Summoner rather than anything with more spells than that.
There's definitely room for a skill based martial character with a sprinkling of Divine spellcasting and a unique combat mechanic in Judgments, and Inquisitor was popular enough I doubt we'll see it reduced to an archetype or Class Path.
I think they are working out the spellcasting system for this class in the Secrets of Magic playtest, as they are wisdom based spontaneous divine casters with casting limited in a manner similar to that of the summoner. It is different enough from the existing classes that it almost certainly needs to be its own class, no matter how much they tweak it from PF1.
Unfortunately, this would mean that we will have to wait at least until the next rulebook after Secrets of Magic to get this class officially, unless they are open to adding new classes in the Lost Omens line.
Assuming they're able to maintain their own stated schedule, the next rulebook after Secrets of Magic and the next Lost Omens book after Secrets of Magic will both release in Fall 2021.
Edit: Before anyone fires back with "They're never going to release a class outside of their GenCon book", Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Wilderness, and Ultimate Intrigue were all outside that window.
I could definitely see a new class in the February-March '22 release, with a playtest announced at Paizocon and running immediately after.
It's annoying to see them spend their time on making classes for concepts that already work in the material that exists, like magus and inquisitor, when there are popular classes we can't meaningfully replicate yet like summoner, gunslinger (fingers crossed for 'drifter'), and occultist. I'm not saying they shouldn't be classes, just that it's vexing to see them take priority.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's annoying to see them spend their time on making classes for concepts that already work in the material that exists, like magus and inquisitor, when there are popular classes we can't meaningfully replicate yet like summoner, gunslinger (fingers crossed for 'drifter'), and occultist. I'm not saying they shouldn't be classes, just that it's vexing to see them take priority.
I don't think it is fair to say that the magus concept really works core, at least not until a number of levels in and even then in a relatively weak capacity.
This said, I think magus should have 100% been a set of class archetypes. "want to play your caster with a more martial focus, here use this class archetype that reduces your spellcasting"
Unfortunately if we keep going at 2 classes put out a year and no more archetypes, it will take a while for every old class to come out (and even longer for cool new ones). So try to enjoy what we have going now I guess? Kineticist is my favorite class by a huge margin but I am having a good time with my earth elemental sorcerer.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unfortunately if we keep going at 2 classes put out a year and no more archetypes, it will take a while for every old class to come out (and even longer for cool new ones).
I wouldn't assume it'll be two per year, and definitely wouldn't assume they're gonna bring over every old Class. The APG had four new Classes, after all, and we already know that Cavalier and Vigilante aren't getting ported over as anything but Archetypes, while Spiritualist seems to be getting rolled into Summoner and Antipaladin wound up a Champion Cause.
Personally, I'd expect, of those Classes remaining, only Inquisitor, Shaman, some of the Occult Classes (particularly Kineticist, Occultist, and Psychic, but possibly Medium or Mesmerist as well), and possibly something to handle Gunslinger (I'm still on the Drifter train, myself) will actually be converted to PF2 as full Classes.
I think the Shifter will be ported over eventually. If they expand the concept beyond animal forms, it would be an avenue that hasn't yet been fully explored in PF2.
Though it suddenly occurs to me that a Synthesis Summoner covers some of the same territory. I myself played it as a "Weredrake kobold". I don't think they'll roll the shifter into the summoner, but it might relieve some of the pressure.
Especially if the Summoner gets "partial manifestation" as feats.
GDI. I need to make some notes for homebrew.
Other than that, I think your list is correct. Some more will be archetypes and class paths of course; eventually EVERYTHING is coming as at least that, but I don't think many more will be full classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh I like the idea of making it part of the investigator
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's annoying to see them spend their time on making classes for concepts that already work in the material that exists, like magus and inquisitor, when there are popular classes we can't meaningfully replicate yet like summoner, gunslinger (fingers crossed for 'drifter'), and occultist. I'm not saying they shouldn't be classes, just that it's vexing to see them take priority.
They haven't spent any time on the Inquisitor though? And have on the summoner? The next book is going to be Magus and summoner and there's a playtest forum for both that is hard to miss.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's annoying to see them spend their time on making classes for concepts that already work in the material that exists, like magus and inquisitor, when there are popular classes we can't meaningfully replicate yet like summoner, gunslinger (fingers crossed for 'drifter'), and occultist. I'm not saying they shouldn't be classes, just that it's vexing to see them take priority.They haven't spent any time on the Inquisitor though? And have on the summoner? The next book is going to be Magus and summoner and there's a playtest forum for both that is hard to miss.
He has in fact participated in the summoner discussions, so I'm really not sure what he's on about.
It's annoying to see them spend their time on making classes for concepts that already work in the material that exists, like magus and inquisitor, when there are popular classes we can't meaningfully replicate yet like summoner, gunslinger (fingers crossed for 'drifter'), and occultist. I'm not saying they shouldn't be classes, just that it's vexing to see them take priority.
People have been clamoring for a gish class for a while now. You can't make a decent one with the current rules, so I'm really glad Paizo tackled the Magus so quickly.
They haven't spent any time on the Inquisitor though? And have on the summoner? The next book is going to be Magus and summoner and there's a playtest forum for both that is hard to miss.
My apologies for being unclear. I intended to suggest that including the summoner in Secrets of Magic does a lot to expand the kinds of characters one can play, while the magus accomplishes less in this regard.
The magus clearly has an avid following, so it's not surprising they chose it. My viewpoint is skewed, I suppose, since my current game includes both a fighter/sorceror and sorceror/fighter who are pleased as punch with their characters, and of the players I know personally, several are excited for the possibilities of the summoner, and none for the magus. The dangers of getting your data from a small sample size.
Personally, I'd expect, of those Classes remaining, only Inquisitor, Shaman, some of the Occult Classes (particularly Kineticist, Occultist, and Psychic, but possibly Medium or Mesmerist as well), and possibly something to handle Gunslinger (I'm still on the Drifter train, myself) will actually be converted to PF2 as full Classes.
Why psychic? Not disputing, just curious. I'd have thought they were the epitome of an occult sorceror, so I must be missing something.
I mean, the magus was decidedly "arcane only" so if that sticks past the playtest then there's room for similar classes in the other three traditions.
I'm not sure if the Inquisitor is more "skills class- divine edition" or "divine gish" though, since "both" is a tall order.
I think there's room for a divine skill oriented class as the Champion is focused on being a defender/tank from a mechanics POV.
I created my homebrew conversion of the D&D 4E Avenger class that thematically is similar to the Inquisitor from my understanding. Both are skillful, "black ops" of their faith.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I intended to suggest that including the summoner in Secrets of Magic does a lot to expand the kinds of characters one can play, while the magus accomplishes less in this regard.
That does make sense, yes.
I see the Magus as sort of the prototype, vanilla Gish. Other gishes and partial casters will follow, but Magi will be the least groundbreaking in its own right, because the ground it is breaking is the opening up of Gish play itself, including this iteration of partial casting.
A summoner will hardly be crippled if they get no more casting than they have, or even get what casting they have taken away entirely. It'll hurt some concepts, but they'll live as long as they keep their focus cantrips. The Magus is where the real testing of the viability of rolling 4 slots is located.
|
|
Why psychic? Not disputing, just curious. I'd have thought they were the epitome of an occult sorceror, so I must be missing something.
Only in the same way an Oracle is the same as a Divine Sorcerer. Both have little in common with the Sorcerer other than being spontaneous casters of the appropriate tradition, both have fundamentally different themes than the Sorcerer in terms of both power origins and how they work, and the Psychic additionally has an entirely different component methodology (which I would expect to see ported over in some form) and a different Key Ability to boot.
There's more need for there to be a truly, thematically, psychic spontaneous full caster with the Occult list than there ever was for Oracle...and there was more than enough need for Oracle to justify the existence of that Class.
Much obliged.
Plus, a lot of the Phrenic Amplifications and other class features they got were super cool. Psychic is a great class that unfortunately was a little boring to play in 1e outside of Amnesiac and some other archetypes.
I'm very in favor of Psychic coming back.
I'm torn on psionics. I think realistically there should be an extreme distrust towards mind mages for what they are capable of reading/changing the minds of people.
But I also love telekinesis and force bubbles and stuff like that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm torn on psionics. I think realistically there should be an extreme distrust towards mind mages for what they are capable of reading/changing the minds of people.
I mean, Arcane magic can do this as well, and Primal magic can permanently turn you into a toad ending your consciousness forever, while Divine magic can literally trap your soul.
There is, in fact, some suspicion of spellcasters in general, but everyone can in fact learn magic, at least in theory, so it's not like it's a truly alien and foreign thing, any more than knowing how to kill people with a sword is (and skilled warriors are also held in suspicion and feared some places, bear in mind).
But I also love telekinesis and force bubbles and stuff like that.
Again, other magic does lots of this stuff.
Psychic magic is basically guaranteed to exist in some form because "people who are psychic casters" already exist in the diagesis (it's reportedly common in Vudra).
The main difference is just that you use thought and emotion components instead of material and somatic components, so you're more concerned about "being unable to concentrate" than "your hands are occupied or you lost your materials pouch." It's not like we're going to start giving classes bespoke spell lists again.
So you could have a universal class archetype that changes "spellcasting" for wizards, bards, etc. who are psychic casters and also several classes that are just that way by default.
I'm torn on psionics. I think realistically there should be an extreme distrust towards mind mages for what they are capable of reading/changing the minds of people.I mean, Arcane magic can do this as well, and Primal magic can permanently turn you into a toad ending your consciousness forever, while Divine magic can literally trap your soul.
There is, in fact, some suspicion of spellcasters in general, but everyone can in fact learn magic, at least in theory, so it's not like it's a truly alien and foreign thing, any more than knowing how to kill people with a sword is (and skilled warriors are also held in suspicion and feared some places, bear in mind).
But I also love telekinesis and force bubbles and stuff like that.Again, other magic does lots of this stuff.
I tend to disassociate the whole access to spell lists from the flavour of a class to some degree.
Like a druid can cast burning hands but I don't really see druids as fire spamming spellcasters conceptually, even though they can be built to be just that.Also with casters you can spot them cast a spell through whatever components or actions are required.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I tend to disassociate the whole access to spell lists from the flavour of a class to some degree.
Like a druid can cast burning hands but I don't really see druids as fire spamming spellcasters conceptually, even though they can be built to be just that.
I mean, even going purely on flavor, being electrocuted to death isn't notably more pleasant and that's straight up the Storm Order's entire schtick.
Also with casters you can spot them cast a spell through whatever components or actions are required.
Actually, even spells with no physically manifested components are visible as glowing runes in the air or via similar things. This was made clear towards the end of PF1 and remains true in PF2, as is mentioned in Conceal Spell (among other places)...speaking of which, Conceal Spell allows precisely this kind of concealment for any spellcaster who cares to multiclass into Wizard for it.
I would expect them to get Conceal Spell or some variant, but it's not basic and inherent to the magic type.
I mean, even going purely on flavor, being electrocuted to death isn't notably more pleasant and that's straight up the Storm Order's entire schtick.I tend to disassociate the whole access to spell lists from the flavour of a class to some degree.
Like a druid can cast burning hands but I don't really see druids as fire spamming spellcasters conceptually, even though they can be built to be just that.
But Storm Order is a flavour specifically sold in the druid class for 2e. I don't think a Flame druid would similarly be antithetical to the class but w/o a specific nod towards it I don't associate them.
Also with casters you can spot them cast a spell through whatever components or actions are required.Actually, even spells with no physically manifested components are visible as glowing runes in the air or via similar things. This was made clear towards the end of PF1 and remains true in PF2, as is mentioned in Conceal Spell (among other places)...speaking of which, Conceal Spell allows precisely this kind of concealment for any spellcaster who cares to multiclass into Wizard for it.
I would expect them to get Conceal Spell or some variant, but it's not basic and inherent to the magic type.
Good points, I am unaccustomed to PF Psionics but enjoyed them in the Forgotten Realms lore, I retract my caveats for the psionics.
But I am going to sideeye any spellcasters henceforth.
Inquisitor and Warpriest were two of my top 5 classes. Warpriest in this edition is lousy. I can't imagine an implementation of Inquisitor that would leave me satisified.
Inquisitor had lots of skills, which they got good class bonuses to. They had spells, which were mostly for buffing and utility. Although there were a few good offensive spells too.
And they had class features which gave them attack and damage bonuses, and even more utility.
They could do everything, not at the maximize level but they could do it all and pretty well. They are incredibly well rounded and their balance of power was in my opinion what all class designs should have strived toward.
But in this new edition I can't see a way to do that.
Skillfulness really depends on the number of legendary skill increases you get. Only the rogue and investigator get extra. Not counting the bastardization of magus and summoner, everybody has full casting progression. We've seen what they did in terms of martial might with the warpriest....even if Inquisitor was brought to PF2 I doubt it would be recognizable in or enjoyable to me.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Inquisitor was one of my top PF1 Classes as well, and I think a PF2 version could work fine. Specifically, I think it'd fit as a Skill Class (like Rogue and Investigator) but with Focus Spells to help and Judgments as a combat mechanic (ala Sneak Attack and Devise A Stratagem). That would maintain most of the flavor I personally cared about in Inquisitor and fit well within the guidelines laid out in this edition so far.
If done properly, that does Skill, Combat, the thematic impact of Judgments/Bane as self-buffs, and enough spellcasting to be useful (at least if you invest in it). I'm not sure what part of the PF1 Inquisitor wouldn't be covered by that, really.