Thoughts on Classes: Inquisitor Edition

[New Willinium]

Thoughts on Classes: Inquisitor Edition


So this has been something on my mind for a while now as something that might be fun for this forum and create some good discussion about a subject SO vital to the game itself. . .The classes. We have a LOOOOT of classes in this game, not including the Prestige Classes which will likely just get rolled into one thread, with four variations to each of these classes to build our characters in different ways.


So today's subject? Today's subject is the rather unique Inquisitor class and it's varying archetypes . The Inquisitor has four basic archetypes: The Base Inquisitor, The Monster Tactician, the Tactical Leader, and the Sacred Huntsman.


Now let's start with the base Inquisitor shall we? The Inquisitor is a rather unique class to the Pathfinder setting that is. . .kind of what you would get if you got a Holy Magus. They have self buffs that last for entire battles called "Judgements" that grow in power as the Inquisitor levels up, they have a domain ability(based off of their chosen Deity of course), and their most important benefit is how they use the Teamwork feats.

Now the Teamwork feats *usually* only work if two party members both have the same feat AND are side by side with one another which can make them rather limiting but with the Inquisitor's SOLO TACTICS ability the Inquisitor will get ALL of those benefits even if the other party member does not have said feats. This can make a Inquisitor one of your biggest and hardest hitting characters down the line as these effects kind of just snowball the more you get. They also get the Bane ability at 5th level, think of it as a more useful Smite Evil, their own Spell list (modified from the Cleric), and a boost to their persuasion and intimidation rolls.

The Inquisitor serves as a FANTASTIC "Face" character if you will. Great for a PC just as the Eldritch Scion is.


Next up is the Monster Tactician. The Monster Tactician is a rather strange and interesting variant on the class as they gain Summon Monster spells after every two levels allowing them to get stronger and stronger summons which they can then BUFF at level 5 by allowing them to all benefit from the MT's Teamwork feats. This can make them really interesting to play though they lose out on the benefit of having 2 and later on 3 judgements going at once. They are not bad.


Then we have the Tactical Leader: The Tactical Leader. . . is kind of weird but they serve as a "Commander" role in the party. With their Swift Tactician ability they are able to share their Teamwork feats with the rest of the party for several rounds and eventually give another character their judgement abilities for a minute. It. . .really has no real downsides.


Finally we have the Sacred Huntsman: The Sacred Huntsman is. . . kind of weird in that they are like a weird mix between a Ranger and a Inquisitor. You see the Sacred Huntsman, at level 4, gains an animal companion that shares their Teamwork feats which can make them into a Duo of pain for the enemies. They also gain the Favored Enemy feat at level 1,5,10,15,and 20 which. . . is always nice if you know what is coming ahead of time. I recommend Fey. They sadly lose out on two of their judgements but with the Animal companion you really don't need them.


I personally would likely stick to the base Inquisitor myself but ALL of these are viable and seem fun, allowing for different playstyles.


So those were the Inquisitor classes and archetypes and I thought that they were all pretty damned awesome, what about the rest of y'all? What do you think of this class and it's archetypes? Are a fan of one over the other? Do you think this is a good class to multi-class into? What are the positives and downsides of the class, and archetypes, in your opinion?

[CHAO$$$]

bad.

>be Monster summoner
>get free teamwork feats for summons
>cant get summon spells outside of class feature
>cant have more than 1 summon spell active

wat

[New Willinium]

Originally posted by CHAO$$$:

bad.

>be Monster tactician
>get free teamwork feats for summons
>cant get summon spells outside of class feature
>cant have more than 1 summon spell active

wat

You still can summon more then a single creature with some of the Summon Spells. That stacks up.

[CHAO$$$]

Im not sure what you are refering to.
You can only use the class feature "summon monster" abilities.
If you use 2 of them in a row all the summons from the 1st cast will disappear.

If i overlooked something please point it out. Im still astonished as to how horrible that is.

[CHAO$$$]

Thats like if youre playing pokemon but youre not allowed to catch them all.
(or at all)

[InEffect]

Only somewhat worth it as a dip for Solo tactics.
Bad class that does literally nothing better than a regular cleric would.
Best sub is sacred as that one at least gets some permanent bonuses and a pet.

[New Willinium]

Originally posted by InEffect:

Only somewhat worth it as a dip for Solo tactics.
Bad class that does literally nothing better than a regular cleric would.
Best sub is sacred as that one at least gets some permanent bonuses and a pet.

I would say that through the usage of Judgements that they serve as better front line/mid line fighters and serve as better “faces” of a party due to their skill line up.

[InEffect]

Not really. Cleric can do that better as well.
Cleric has:
More AC
More Str
More(and better) Spells.
Even if you limit your cleric investments to 15-16 levels to be more fightery it's still gonna be better than inquisitor ever would be in that role.
And if we are going to compare him to other 3/4 casters like bard/magus/alchemist it's even more sad.

[New Willinium]

Originally posted by InEffect:

Not really. Cleric can do that better as well.
Cleric has:
More AC
More Str
More(and better) Spells.
Even if you limit your cleric investments to 15-16 levels to be more fightery it's still gonna be better than inquisitor ever would be in that role.
And if we are going to compare him to other 3/4 casters like bard/magus/alchemist it's even more sad.

I've never actually got into the Bard classes myself. They always seemed to be too much of a split between Fighter/Rogue/Wizard and back in the old days was crippled by being unable to wear armor without their spells failing immediately. That's thankfully not much of an issue in this game though and they have some interesting archetypes.


I still think I prefer the Inquisitor to the Cleric or the Crusader though both from a gameplay point, more unique and more going on to manage, and from just thinking them of being more interesting as a role.

[Ashley]

Inquisitors have things Clerics can't do despite not getting as many spells and fill their own niche. It's a good class, and the "experts" are free to think otherwise.

[InEffect]

Originally posted by Buster:

Inquisitors have things Clerics can't do despite not getting as many spells and fill their own niche. It's a good class, and the "experts" are free to think otherwise.

Next time instead of making baseless statements try producing at least one argument.
What exactly inquisitor does that cleric can't do better apart from being a 3level dip for seize the moment users?

[Ashley]

Originally posted by InEffect:

Originally posted by Buster:

Inquisitors have things Clerics can't do despite not getting as many spells and fill their own niche. It's a good class, and the "experts" are free to think otherwise.

Next time instead of making baseless statements try producing at least one argument.
What exactly inquisitor does that cleric can't do better?

They get free Teamwork Feats that they can share (or not) and have a powerful offensive ability? That's objective, not my opinion.

You're free to think whatever you want. Someone thinking a class is good just because you don't isn't a personal attack on you.

[InEffect]

It's not about being personal. I can vaguely state X is a a better class than Y. That means nothing and has 0 weight without concrete evidence.
Useful teamwork feats(namely, Outflank) are taken on everyone. Others can be safely ignored. Seize the moment users dip 3 levels into a inq. But that's just a dip as inquisitor itself is a garbage melee.
Only thing they have is bane weapon that ends too fast. Clerics can reach comparable damage/AB with buffs that are not as limited in time and uses. Even with angelic aspect/eaglesoul/geniekind(all of which inq has no access to) they are more than competitive in terms of damage output while being full casters and actually having a good spell-list full of support for your team and two domains to add even more utility. And if we are talking full buff you'd have to add legendary proportions and firightful aspect there for even more AC/STR/Damage boost.
Inqusitor also can't even hope to reach the AC that Ecc/monk1 can with whatever dips. Because they just don't have to tools for it. Ecc can actually break 70AC by endgame without much trouble so that's another thing inq does worse.

Literally all that is factually correct from what you said is inquisitor makes a half-decent 3/6level dip for mad dog or ranger. That's it. Others can do better than that.

[Ashley]

I didn't say anything about one class being objectively better than another. I said one can do things another can't.

Like I said, you are more than free to think and feel whatever you want. Just because someone thinks otherwise is NOT a personal attack on you. But, keep on keeping on. You're obviously the "expert" here.

[InEffect]

So you have not a single example of what exactly inquisitor can do that others can't(something useful that is). Gotcha

[InEffect]

So you have not a single example of what exactly inquisitor can do that others can't(something useful that is). Gotcha