What do you want out of an Inquisitor in 2E?

[keftiu]

I increasingly don't know how much I care about slotted casting. Some kind of smite and interesting Feat support for being a sneaky, clever, mean bastard in the name of your god is what I'm really here for.

I don't feel beholden at all to 1e mechanics, so long as the class fantasy - holy secret agent, divine assassin - lands.

[The Raven Black]

Improved Eldritch Trickster with Divine MC ?

Magus-like but with a deeper Rogue flavor ?

Investigator with Divine spellcasting (and likely WIS-based features and KAS instead of INT) ?

[Rysky]

Holy Utili-belt

[keftiu]

The Raven Black wrote:

Improved Eldritch Trickster with Divine MC ?

Magus-like but with a deeper Rogue flavor ?

Investigator with Divine spellcasting (and likely WIS-based features and KAS instead of INT) ?

I think my perfect Inquisitor/Intercessor/Avenger is at the center of a triangle comprised of "Holy Magus," "Investigator," and an assassin-y Rogue.

As an aside: I want an 'eldritch investigator' methodology for Investigator SO badly.

[Perpdepog]

keftiu wrote:

As an aside: I want an 'eldritch investigator' methodology for Investigator SO badly.

I miss Psychic Detective so much...

[Tender Tendrils]

I'm not super keen on this class being a caster at all, aside from focus spells. Something more like a ranger or champion, where they just get some focus spells but are otherwise a martial with some divine magic themed mechanics (like judgement).

I don't want to be running around casting heal or bless or whatever on this character, I want to mark a demon with some kind of mechanic similar to hunt prey, track it through the city to its hiding place, apply a judgement to it that gives it some kind of nasty debuff, then shoot it with my crossbow. The guy who actually casts spells is the cleric, and he tells me that they suspect there might be a demon in the village, and gives me some holy water and blesses me before I go of to hunt down my quarry, and the champion is the muscle who normally would deal with it but doesn't have the expertise, cunning and street smarts I do, so I get called in instead.

[The Raven Black]

Divine Black Ops is the feeling I get for the Inquisitor.

I really wish I could find a better name though.

[CorvusMask]

Inquisition for me at least is so far past in history that I don't really see it as offensive term (though name makes you think of bad guys instantly) but I'm not sure I'm qualified to comment on this one either since I don't believe it has ever been an institution in Finland.

But yeah realized I never actually commented on topic subject so here:

I think first thing inquisitor needs to accomplish is a build that you can't do just with multiclass archetypes. Like you can play rogue with divine spells and such already, so inquisitor needs a gimmick that couldn't just be replicated with archetype if its to be a full class.

Considering that inquisitors did have thing with teamwork feats(iirc), I do think it could work as some sort of "attack coordination" class, like divine caster version of bard maybe in a way? Bards are able to be buffers/debuffers, casters and even decent in melee and with skills obviously, so inquisitors could be something like that but just in more distinct way to "spend one action every round to perform" gimmick bards have

[ssims2]

I had the idea of a class chassis that could combine multiple PF1 classes into one using subclasses. The class itself could be called Seeker or something else suitably generic, since the subclass determines much of the concept. Each subclass would have its own unique Focus mechanic, and could make minor adjustments to the class chassis (like Cleric doctrines do).

Base class would be a spontaneous wavecaster (tradition determined by subclass) with master martial & medium armor proficiency.

Subclasses could include Inquisitor (Divine with Wis as key ability), Hunter (Primal with Wis as key ability), Medium (Occult with Cha as key ability) and Bloodrager (Arcane with Cha as key ability). Names could change and class concepts could vary somewhat from PF1.

1) Inquisitor: instead of Divine cantrips, you get Focus cantrips called Judgements. There would be a dozen or so, divided between combat and utility, and you'd chose 5. Judgements act like stances - the cantrip turns on the judgement, and it stays on until you use another or it gets deactivated. The Inquisitor can use a free action activity (1/round) to "amp" an active judgement (inspired by the Psychic playtest) - the trigger, duration, and effect of the amp would vary based on the judgement, and all amps would be combat-only (because of the nature of Focus Points). For instance, a judgement that provides a bonus to tracking (utility) could have an amp that triggers when you roll Survival for initiative, and could provide a short-term attack and damage bonus vs. a target you've been tracking. The Inquisitor could also get to choose one Cleric Domain (like the Champion).

2) Hunter: instead of Primal cantrips, you get Focus cantrips called Animal Aspects. These would act pretty much like judgements, but the effects would be more Primal-themed. For instance, you could have several that give basic natural weapon attacks (bite, claw, etc.). The Hunter could start with an animal companion, and there would be the usual feats to advance the companion. Hunter and Inquisitor are similar enough in concept that they could share a number of class feats.

3) Medium: you have access to 6 or so different Spirits - you choose a Spirit at the start of each day, and that Spirit determines which Occult cantrips you have access to that day, and a specific Focus spell you can use. Each Spirit would provide certain ongoing passive benefits, as well as a particular drawback. So you are basically switching out key portions of your class chassis each day, and this increased flexibility would need to be balanced by a little loss in power (no "amp" ability).

4) Bloodrager: you choose a Sorcerer Bloodline. In addition to what a Sorcerer would get (spells known, Focus spells, etc.), your Bloodline provides you with certain ongoing passive benefits, as well as a particular drawback. You can spend a Focus point as a single action to enter a Bloodrage, which is similar to a Barbarian's Rage, but which also triggers "amp" effects based on your Bloodline for the duration, and during the 1 minute "cooldown" period, you lose your passive Bloodline benefits (but not the drawback). Since you're stuck with a single Bloodline, and so have less flexibility than the other subclasses, the Bloodline abilities can be slightly more powerful in compensation.

[UnArcaneElection]

^I like the first 3 parts of this, although I think a Bloodrager is enough more like a Barbarian (but needs something to get decent action economy that a Barbarian + Sorcerer multiclass wouldn't get) that it wouldn't really fit into this scheme. But that's okay -- Magus is the Arcane non-Summoner wavecaster for now (and Summoner is very specialized no matter which Tradition you pick), and your Inquisitor/Hunter/Medium Seeker could fill in the rest.

(Actually, for Bloodrager, I'm beginning to wonder if this might be best done as a Barbarian Instinct that includes the action economy fix. That should probably go in another thread to avoid derailing this one, though.)

[keftiu]

(I fully expect Bloodrager as a Class Archetype for Barbarian.)

[The Raven Black]

keftiu wrote:

(I fully expect Bloodrager as a Class Archetype for Barbarian.)

That should get its own thread. I am very interested in how you see this but I don't want to derail this Inquisitor thread.

[ssims2]

Perhaps I was trying too hard to fit 4 PF1 classes into one chassis. The first 3 fit much better than Bloodrager, mechanically and thematically.

Maybe instead of Bloodrager, the Arcane subclass of the "Seeker" could be a Scion. Key stat Cha, as before, and chooses a single Sorcerer Bloodline. The Scion's "amp" effect would have nothing to do with Rage (well, maybe the Demonic Bloodline could include a Rage-like effect in it's amp), but would provide a short-term benefit (usually 1 minute) at the cost of losing access to your Bloodline's passive benefits until you Refocus. That would make the "amp" effect more of a per-encounter thing, so the sub-class would have to be balanced around you probably having access to it in every combat.

The interesting part of the Bloodrager for me was always the Bloodline and how it manifested itself in a martial class - not so much the Barbarian-specific stuff that came from Bloodrager's status as a hybrid class. The Scion uses the Bloodlines, but is otherwise a vanilla martial. Of course, individual Bloodlines could add a lot of flavor and special abilities - as suggested, Demonic could provide a Rage-like effect, while Angelic could provide Champion-like flavor, etc.

[pixierose]

ssims2 wrote:

Perhaps I was trying too hard to fit 4 PF1 classes into one chassis. The first 3 fit much better than Bloodrager, mechanically and thematically.

Maybe instead of Bloodrager, the Arcane subclass of the "Seeker" could be a Scion. Key stat Cha, as before, and chooses a single Sorcerer Bloodline. The Scion's "amp" effect would have nothing to do with Rage (well, maybe the Demonic Bloodline could include a Rage-like effect in it's amp), but would provide a short-term benefit (usually 1 minute) at the cost of losing access to your Bloodline's passive benefits until you Refocus. That would make the "amp" effect more of a per-encounter thing, so the sub-class would have to be balanced around you probably having access to it in every combat.

The interesting part of the Bloodrager for me was always the Bloodline and how it manifested itself in a martial class - not so much the Barbarian-specific stuff that came from Bloodrager's status as a hybrid class. The Scion uses the Bloodlines, but is otherwise a vanilla martial. Of course, individual Bloodlines could add a lot of flavor and special abilities - as suggested, Demonic could provide a Rage-like effect, while Angelic could provide Champion-like flavor, etc.

I think tying anything explicitly arcane to sorcerer is a bad idea, sorcerers in 2e are the first flexible caster and I think that is super important to the 2e rendition of it.

And while I can get the idea behind this I find the concept kind of clunky and I would be concerned about being able to fulfill all of those fantasies in one base class. But it's it's interesting idea

[pixierose]

Hmmm what if the inquisitor with a martial with a wide range of focus spells, and had a mechanic of like " at the start of combat you regain a focus point." Or once per 10 minuites if you are out of focus spells you regain a focus point(maybe that can be a high level feat. Maybe it costs an action and can be done in combat)

So you would have like martial capabilities, divine feats that let you do pseudo spells stuff. And you always have the right focus spell for the job. The focus spells can range from domain spells from your gods, utility spells that help you stealth or do other things, and magus ex spells where you do something divine and attack.

I think that specific mechanic can be fenced off away so that you cant get it via the archetype and it doesn't break the game.

It also sort of reminds me of book of 9 swords/path of war stuff which can maybe another inspiration specifically the likes of the crusader and the zealot.

[Kekkres]

focus emphasis could be interesting especially if their focus spells are one action or reaction spells so they dont get too clunky in martial gameplay, I think it would also be interesting if they had some sort of mechanic that basically said "this has access to the divine spell list for purposes of wands scrolls staves ect" to allow them to stay caster adjacent without spending too much of their power budget on being a caster

[Loreguard]

Kekkres wrote:

focus emphasis could be interesting especially if their focus spells are one action or reaction spells so they dont get too clunky in martial gameplay, I think it would also be interesting if they had some sort of mechanic that basically said "this has access to the divine spell list for purposes of wands scrolls staves etc" to allow them to stay caster adjacent without spending too much of their power budget on being a caster

Actually, having class features that might be very similar to having a divine sorcerer or cleric archetype might be viable.

Give them access to divine (or potentially primal) cantrips, along with the ability to cast spells from the divine list from scrolls, wands, and potentially even staves. Then access to focus cantrips and/or other spells. This would give them access to much of divine spellcasting, but via equipment that those divine forces would would have access to loan/give to the Inquisitor.

Perhaps have class feats to give them an actual spell slot they could use, but it would be an investment that they would choose to go down, rather than assuming the class would utilize it. (this would however, of course prohibit it from utilizing flexible casting archetype option, as it wouldn't be a full caster)

I'll confess there is still a part of me that likes Inquisitors technically being Occult, despite being normally part of a divine infrastructure. It seemed very important that how they got their spells and their connection and constraints to their deities Anathema was somehow different for Inquisitors. That Occult connection was a potential reason.

[Novem]

The Inquisitor is super interesting thematically but never one I thought was all that fun to play in 1E. The focus on Teamwork Feats in particular was incredibly odd for a class essentially all about hunting people and information down for your deity whatever the cost. All I want from a 2E Inquisitor is a class that is more resonant with the class's themes mechanically. No Teamwork feats, but a focus on identifying those have committed acts against your divine patron's wishes and punishing them accordingly.

[Rysky]

I'd say Inquisitor didn't have a focus on Teamwork feats at all, since they got them them but their core ability related to them, Solo Tactics, made it so they could use them without other people having to have them, as opposed to the Cavalier who gave their teammates the feats for free. A lone wolf aesthetic fit the Inquisitor narratively.

I honestly forgot they got Teamwork feats, their other abilities were much more interesting.

[Perpdepog]

Rysky wrote:

I'd say Inquisitor didn't have a focus on Teamwork feats at all, since they got them them but their core ability related to them, Solo Tactics, made it so they could use them without other people having to have them, as opposed to the Cavalier who gave their teammates the feats for free. A lone wolf aesthetic fit the Inquisitor narratively.

I honestly forgot they got Teamwork feats, their other abilities were much more interesting.

I honestly forgot about teamwork feats.

[Rysky]

Perpdepog wrote:

Rysky wrote:

I'd say Inquisitor didn't have a focus on Teamwork feats at all, since they got them them but their core ability related to them, Solo Tactics, made it so they could use them without other people having to have them, as opposed to the Cavalier who gave their teammates the feats for free. A lone wolf aesthetic fit the Inquisitor narratively.

I honestly forgot they got Teamwork feats, their other abilities were much more interesting.

I honestly forgot about teamwork feats.

Pretty much everyone does.

[UnArcaneElection]

^. . . which is too bad, because Teamwork Feats are good concept. They should have had some incentive to take them. But 2nd Edition seems to have dropped many if not all of them altogether, so unless they are going to get reintroduced with the Inquisitor, I don't think they are going to be an Inquisitor feature. They might replace Teamwork Feats and Solo Tactics with Inquisitor feats that allow you to use others as unwittingn allies.

[Rysky]

They were a good concept in theory.

In play they were awful.

In addition to being mostly lackluster they forced others to follow your build path if they wanted to function, a Fighter spending a feat? No problem. Making the Rogue, Barbarian, and Wizard spend their’s as well? Not so much.

The above is semi-hyberolism but it highlights the flaw of forcing everyone to spend their resources on the same thing in order for it to function, moreso when you could take non-teamwork feats that were more useful or did the exact thing.

Basically only Inquisitors and Cavaliers took Teamwork feats because A) they had abilities that let them get around the restrictions and B) they literally got them for free so they had to take them XD

Every time I played either of those classes I struggled to find interesting teamwork feats to take.

Teamwork buffing abilities should work like Bard and Marshal, everyone in the group doesn’t have to take a feat in order to benefit from Inspire Courage, they just get it.

[nick1wasd]

I think the Inquis might do well with more Psychic style single/double slot casting, or only focus and have some mechanic like "After landing a critical Strike, your next focus spell is free/you get a focus point back." To make bonk-sticking your foes the center, and spell-weaving auxiliary, but also intermingling the two to feed off each other. Spare skill ups/feats like Swashbuckler/Inventor would be cool, and I don't know much about Judgements from 1e, but stances or SMITE! style bonus damage would make perfect sense.

[keftiu]

I want to be the offensive counterpart to defensive Champions and support Clerics, and I want the class fantasy of being a holy secret agent.

Specific mechanics are secondary to those two points for me.

[Perpdepog]

Rysky wrote:

They were a good concept in theory.

In play they were awful.

In addition to being mostly lackluster they forced others to follow your build path if they wanted to function, a Fighter spending a feat? No problem. Making the Rogue, Barbarian, and Wizard spend their’s as well? Not so much.

The above is semi-hyberolism but it highlights the flaw of forcing everyone to spend their resources on the same thing in order for it to function, moreso when you could take non-teamwork feats that were more useful or did the exact thing.

Basically only Inquisitors and Cavaliers took Teamwork feats because A) they had abilities that let them get around the restrictions and B) they literally got them for free so they had to take them XD

Every time I played either of those classes I struggled to find interesting teamwork feats to take.

Teamwork buffing abilities should work like Bard and Marshal, everyone in the group doesn’t have to take a feat in order to benefit from Inspire Courage, they just get it.

The only teamwork feat I recall ever seeing at a table was a couple of people taking Outflank. Other than that, never saw a single one. Even the cavs I played with would tend to take archetypes which traded out that feature lol.

[QuidEst]

One of my annoyances with the class in PF1 was that it was a charisma class masquerading as a wisdom class. So many charisma skill bonuses and substitutions to use wisdom instead, and magical lie detection instead of using sense motive.

I expect PF2 to resolve that, either by just making it charisma-based (unlikely with Champion existing) or by toning down the substitutions. Maybe they can use perception for the coerce effect of intimidate by reading vulnerabilities, but aren't messing around with shouting at enemies in combat. Maybe invoking a judgement forces a save vs. frightened. Maybe there are three class paths for focusing on intimidate, deception, and diplomacy instead of the class trying to do all three.

[Squiggit]

The base inquisitor got bonuses to knowledge, intimidate, sense motive and survival.

"So many charisma bonuses" seems like an overstatement.

[Loreguard]

I originally liked the origninal Teamwork feats, Precise Strike, and I think Outflank, maybe Pack Attack. I'm pretty sure I had an Inquisitor with Precise Strike, and may have had a Marshall that offered it as a shared feat.

I'd love to see teamwork feats where having a feat allowed you to share a reaction with a team-mate. Likely consuming your reaction to share it unless the other individual shared the teamwork feat.

But allow having a teamwork feat, allow you to spend a reaction to give a reaction in certain circumstances to an ally.

However, I have to admin I don't see Solo Tactics/Teamwork feats as central to the identity of the Inquisitor. It was just a part of the prior class due to the book introducing teamwork feats was with the Inquisitor, and they probably invented them in part for the Cavalier, and figured with Inquisitors being secret agents/solo actors, invented a way for them to leverage them too.

Instilling fear, seeing through deceptions, something smite-like, and offering team buffs/debuffs seem more core to their identity.

[QuidEst]

Squiggit wrote:

The base inquisitor got bonuses to knowledge, intimidate, sense motive and survival.

"So many charisma bonuses" seems like an overstatement.

Agreed on base, but my experience was definitely colored by exclusively seeing Inquisitors substituting wisdom or double wisdom for charisma skills.

[NECR0G1ANT]

QuidEst wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

The base inquisitor got bonuses to knowledge, intimidate, sense motive and survival.

"So many charisma bonuses" seems like an overstatement.

Agreed on base, but my experience was definitely colored by exclusively seeing Inquisitors substituting wisdom or double wisdom for charisma skills.

I did that, but that was more of a PF1 min/max dump stat thing.

[Novem]

Rysky wrote:

I'd say Inquisitor didn't have a focus on Teamwork feats at all, since they got them them but their core ability related to them, Solo Tactics, made it so they could use them without other people having to have them, as opposed to the Cavalier who gave their teammates the feats for free. A lone wolf aesthetic fit the Inquisitor narratively.

I honestly forgot they got Teamwork feats, their other abilities were much more interesting.

Then you'd be... wrong? They cover a very significant portion of the class's power budget. Solo Tactics may allow benefits without teammates having the feats, but it still requires them to have teammates and some of the teamwork feats in 1E were extremely overpowered, like Seize the Moment or Outflank. I'm not saying Teamwork Feats were the Inquisitor's most interesting feature, but it was the most important to its mechanical strength given its lacking divine spell progression and limited use of Judgement until the later levels. Though, some of the class's other features weren't that synergistic with its theme either. Like, I to this day don't understand why they were a skill monkey or what that had to do with the themes of the Inqusitor as a class. Inquisitor's seem the type to push people away in their relentless pursuit of their goal/target, it's weird for the class to be so focused on working with others instead of accomplishing their own objectives at any cost. Maybe that's just me having a bad perception of the class though, I dunno, but that idea was always what made the class interesting to me.

[Sanityfaerie]

Novem wrote:

Rysky wrote:

I'd say Inquisitor didn't have a focus on Teamwork feats at all, since they got them them but their core ability related to them, Solo Tactics, made it so they could use them without other people having to have them, as opposed to the Cavalier who gave their teammates the feats for free. A lone wolf aesthetic fit the Inquisitor narratively.

I honestly forgot they got Teamwork feats, their other abilities were much more interesting.

Then you'd be... wrong? They cover a very significant portion of the class's power budget. Solo Tactics may allow benefits without teammates having the feats, but it still requires them to have teammates and some of the teamwork feats in 1E were extremely overpowered, like Seize the Moment or Outflank. I'm not saying Teamwork Feats were the Inquisitor's most interesting feature, but it was the most important to its mechanical strength given its lacking divine spell progression and limited use of Judgement until the later levels. Though, some of the class's other features weren't that synergistic with its theme either. Like, I to this day don't understand why they were a skill monkey or what that had to do with the themes of the Inqusitor as a class. Inquisitor's seem the type to push people away in their relentless pursuit of their goal/target, it's weird for the class to be so focused on working with others instead of accomplishing their own objectives at any cost. Maybe that's just me having a bad perception of the class though, I dunno, but that idea was always what made the class interesting to me.

They absolutely *should* be a skill monkey. Their whole thing is hunting down and rooting our and eradicating the corruption within. That sort of hunting down part calls for significant application of skills, both social and otherwise.

As for the teamwork thing... that one's more interesting. There's certainly a lone wolf concept out there to play with, but there's another one where they are absolutely all about working with others to slay fell beasts that no one of them could take alone, simply because there are too many missions and not enough inquisitors to go around, so that they *must* lean on others for help.

Like, of the wave casters, the martial aspect of the classic Magus is a fighter or perhaps a swashbuckler. The martial aspect of the Intercessor is a Rogue. Like, out of the pf2 skills, I can see reasonably strongly in-theme applications for everything except Crafting, Medicine, and Performance. Thievery and Society might be a bit iffy. The knowledge skills let you know your enemy, Acrobatics and Athletics help you hunt down and get to your enemy, Survival lets you track them, Stealth and Deception let you infiltrate after you've found them in order to get the best opportunity to strike, and Diplomacy and Intimidate are useful for getting your contacts to talk.

Really, "Divine-powered Batman" is right in the middle of the Intercessor sweet spot, at least if you lighten up on being willing to kill things. That's all sorts of skill monkey.

[The Raven Black]

"Divine-powered Batman"

Cool idea.

What models from pop culture or other do people have in mind when they think of an Inquisitor / Intercessor ?

[The Raven Black]

Strangely enough, what comes to me is Divine-powered Ethan Hunt.

[Rysky]

“Then you'd be... wrong? They cover a very significant portion of the class's power budget.”

No they don’t.

Bane and Judgement say hello.

[Sanityfaerie]

Well... as far as budget goes, six feats over 20 levels plus a class feature that makes them more generally useful plus the ability to hotswap one of those feats as a standard action... that's not nothing. I make no claims as to how much value they got out of it, because I have no data on that subject, but it looks like it's at least a not entirely trivial chunk of budget. Heck - they even have an alternate class capstone for it that lets you hand out copies of your teamwork feats like candy to all your friends.

That said, I'd still dispute the "then you'd be... wrong?" assertion since it utterly failed to address the point it was made in response to (ie, that they don't really count as teamwork feats because Solo Tactics takes the teamworkness out of them.)

[Loreguard]

Keeping in mind however, that going from 1st edition to second edition, things that were packaged in and progressed for everyone of a class, in many cases in 2nd edition become a choice or path. With Druids and their animal companion, their shapeshifting and their elemental costing focuses.

So while they might have gotten use out of the mechanic, I know I specifically did. I wouldn't necessarily say that mechanic was core to all that was the inquisitor. That it isn't hard to imagine an inquisitor without that specific mechanic, and I don't know I'd feel like it was missing something 'flavor-wise' because of missing it.

Someone mentioned the thought of making an inquisitor have to choose a path, deception, intimidation, or diplomacy. Ok, honestly, I generally don't imagine most inquisitors being iconic diplomats, unless you are talking about 'McCarthy' as a diplomat. I disliked that idea, because for me, an inquisitor might need to go undercover at one point, or go angry intimidation in another chapter, and wouldn't want to have to choose. But I don't know if I may be falling into the same situation where, I didn't necessarily love the idea of a druid having to choose between wildshape and a wilderness companion. Which in then end, while I wouldn't have thought I'd have wanted to go down that road. When it was the official path, within all the contexts of all the changes, became a reasonable design.

With that in mind, while I loved using solo tactics and teamwork feats on my inquisitors. Those aspects weren't as important of flavor and mechanics to the Nature of who the were, that if some pieces had to fall off and become more generic options to be picked up with general feats or an archetype of some sort. Teamwork feats and/or solo tactics type implementation seem like pieces I'd give up sooner than having a sort of edge (not necessarily enormous) on intimidation, something bane/smite-like, and an ability to buff/debuff things supernaturally, such as judgements/spellcasting.

Now, as worded... maybe someone who has to come in and leverage the people to go out and hunt and kill this supernatural evil who is besetting a poor village, might very well be a character concept someone else had, and maybe solo tactics might have actually been central to that implementation. I just felt like in the concepts I knew, (and they all used solo tactics and teamwork feats) it was one of the least important parts from my perspective.

I'm also probably drawn to the thought/question of in addition to rewriting the inquisitor for 2nd edition, are they willing and ready to reimplement teamwork feats for everyone in 2nd edition? Hitting both of those, makes me willing to look at an inquisitor without teamwork feats as viable, even if future supplement includes teamwork feats, and potentially includes something like solo tactics to help an Inquisitor use them as a separate option in that publication. Marshall archetype might get some other benefit towards such feats as well they could invest in.

[Sanityfaerie]

From the sounds of things, Teamwork feats weren't great when they came out, and they'd be downright terrible for PFS. I certainly think we coudl have a teamwork path, though, or perhaps give the inquisitor class feats that count as both sides of the teamwork. "Take this feat, and you gain this benefit from your allies while they gain the same benefit from you." It would fit kind of nicely into a "divine not-spellcasting" feel. I'm not sure quite how that would work, but Divine spells are pretty heavy on buffing yourself and others, and this feels like it might feed into that in an interesting and flavorful way that wasn't beholden to spell slots.

[keftiu]

I do hope that it has a proper, no-fuss smite of some sort - something straightforward, and not requiring a roll the way a lot of the post-core classes do.

[Rysky]

That and/or a divine damage over time would be neat as well.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

keftiu wrote:

I do hope that it has a proper, no-fuss smite of some sort - something straightforward, and not requiring a roll the way a lot of the post-core classes do.

Perhaps using other limiters than a skill check to justify its power budget. I know Ranger already has Hunt Prey but I feel like a similar 'mark target for slaying' would be really fitting as a modernized Bane. I would rather it be a more interesting or unique mechanic, but if it were nearly a complete copy of precision hunter's edge, it wouldn't be that bad.

...maybe something taking a page from Magus' playbook--enter a stance that costs a focus point to become filled with divine judgement. Maybe it's targeted and once your enemy perishes you can choose to retarget another foe, perhaps as an action on your next turn, perhaps automatically.

[Rysky]

Bane was my favourite part of Inquisitor in P1.

Maybe "x bonus to skills/damage vs members of this religion/organization" than a creature bane.

Stance-Focus-Judgments sound neat.

[The-Magic-Sword]

I actually really like the idea, in general, of Inquisitors entering a divine powered stance to fight, but I think it should be much bigger than arcane cascade (and take up more of the power budget) one idea is that you could make it a kind of rage state, whether that costs focus or a slot is up in the air for me but I see I think making them like these divine assassins who can enter a 'judgement' state to lay down the hurt. I imagine a cloaked spy figure, who has machinations, or gets to the bottom of something evil, pulls down their hood, and their eyes start burning with divine wrath as they pull their weapons out and pronounce judgement on some evil doer, or that they're here to destroy some terrible abomination before it can be used to hurt the people.

I would def want to treat the 4e avenger as a conceptual touchstone, but not the only one. I think the popular touchstones are a lot of magical and divine 'assassins' who tend to use magic heavily when they attack directly but aren't necessarily arcane flavored. Actually, Gray from Fate comes to mind the most right now but she's far from the only one, especially in that series.

Really, I think that its more that the Inquisitor exists at an intersection that other Divine Classes aren't and generally don't seem to do super well-- the way the cleric and champion and oracle all ended up leaves room for a few things-- the Champion is martial but has very little casting and is primarily offensive, the Warpriest is a defensive cleric with a lot of casting but can't focus on weapons as much as some people want it to (instead taking potshot swings with third actions when played optimally), and we don't have a lot of church assassin vibes in either (although, Dex Champions are functional in their own right.)

So in tandem with certain concepts from media, you get this idea of a church spy and assassin that naturally fits into this dynamic of an espionage arm of powerful religious organizations. They wield more divine magic than the Champion, but more weapons than the Cleric, and can have a covert vibe-- but they still lay down the smite.

That's one thing I think you can def do as well, explore cool concepts that are heavily implied by the gaps of what exists, rather than having an immediate 'this is how you play x' touchstone-- its not impossible for the TTRPG to be 'source' material for the concept, a lot of modern media in fact comes from DND and co inspiring what are essentially their own permutation of fantasy, you know your fighter, wizard, cleric, thief that feature so prominently in a lot of video games and anime and such.

One freeing thing, is that when you get right down to it, most of the pf2e player base at this point, aren't super invested in making it work like the pf1e version, so long as it has a strong identity and works well.

[keftiu]

TMC, how do we get you on the Inquisitor design team? You’ve pretty much nailed it there; I hope Paizo can do the same (and soon)!

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Yes! That's pretty much exactly the kind of thing I was thinking. A bigger Arcade Cascade that maybe uses focus points (though I wonder how much room that leaves for adding more focus spells through feats if your 'big' judgment thing is also a focus spell--something to workshop).

Bonus, as far as names go and the mention I saw somewhere of preferring a name other than Inquisitor--I wouldn't necessarily mind Avenger of the holy sort. Perhaps something else could be more specific and thematic but it still does the job.

[keftiu]

Avenger, Intercessor, and Confessor are my favorite alternative names of those I’ve heard.

[The Raven Black]

TBH the above mechanically sounds like a WIS-powered cross between Divine Magus and Rogue. Which admittedly could be great.

Not sure how to properly balance it though.

What do people think of the Eldritch Trickster Rogue with a Cleric MC ? What is missing to make it into the Inquisitor ?

[keftiu]

The Raven Black wrote:

What do people think of the Eldritch Trickster Rogue with a Cleric MC ? What is missing to make it into the Inquisitor ?

I don’t know that having the divine spell list excited me all that much. Something that feels more like a Spellstrike or a 1e Smite than just a sneak attack is pretty important. You should be able to hang with the martials in the party, but have a couple divine tricks up your sleeve - both in a fight, and (Investigator-style) outside of one.

I’m increasingly uncertain that this class needs spell slots; that feels like it’ll eat up the power budget for all the fun other toys it could have. A couple focus spells and access to domains feels like that might be enough to sell the fantasy without making them unsatisfying in other regards.

[Rysky]

Yeah having it have spells like Paladin/Ranger/Monk should work fine.