# What do you think of the Inquisitor?



## Herobizkit (May 30, 2010)

Personally, I love it.  At first glance, it appears to be a Divine Bard/Marshal on 'roids.  I'm not a big fan of the fluff, but being fluff, I can always change it.

Anyone used it in play?  Overpowered?  Underpowered?


----------



## Shazman (May 30, 2010)

I haven't played one yet, but I may be playing one next week.  It looks like a solid class.


----------



## Herobizkit (Jun 2, 2010)

No one wanted to play the Inquisitor, but everyone loved the Witch?  Bah.


----------



## White Wizard (Jun 2, 2010)

I think the reason your not getting a lot of response is because it is a solid straight forward class.  You hear a lot more about the summoner because it is so unique, and the witch because it is questionably underpowered. The inquisitor looks built really well and looks as if it will fit well as a secondary fighter. I havn't used it yet and probably won't have the opportunity too for a little while.


----------



## gamerprinter (Jun 2, 2010)

The Inquisitor has the feel of a divine ranger with slightly more spell access...

GP


----------



## White Wizard (Jun 2, 2010)

I had the very same impression. I had hoped they would have done an arcane warrior type.  You have the ranger who is the nature warrior, you had the paladin as the holy warrior, we just needed the arcane warrior but oh well. Still like the class.  It just seems they took the flavor from the 4e avenger.


----------



## Twowolves (Jun 2, 2010)

gamerprinter said:


> The Inquisitor has the feel of a divine ranger with slightly more spell access...
> 
> GP




To me, it looks like a divine ranger +++.

As in "I can do anything a ranger can do, better".


----------



## gamerprinter (Jun 2, 2010)

*Build a gish off the Inquisitor as a template...*

I've built a couple of new classes, at least one of them going into an upcoming publication. I created a samurai, using the ranger as a template, I just replaced unneeded abilities with ones more appropriate for a samurai (like Ki instead of divine spells) and maintaining the former abilities progression, but used same BAB, saves and the Combat Style with five different appropriate samurai styles.

It might worthy to try and build a Gish using the Inquisitor as a template.

Replace judgments with something else that's more "gishy" or just different kinds of judgements more appropriate for a wizard or sorcerer. Replace divine spell list with arcane spell list, though would be appropriate to limit the list, just as the inquisitor is limited - absolutely up to 6th level spells only. Then just stick with the Inquisitor on most everything else. Team feats seem appropriate.

By using the Pathfinder Core and Advanced classes as a template, I can feel fairly safe that my classes are Pathfinder balanced by design, though it would still require extensive playtesting and tweaking, but it might be worth a try...

GP


----------



## Herobizkit (Jun 3, 2010)

Twowolves said:


> To me, it looks like a divine ranger +++.
> 
> As in "I can do anything a ranger can do, better".



Would you say, then, that an Inquisitor and a Ranger in the same party might be redundant?


----------



## gamerprinter (Jun 3, 2010)

Herobizkit said:


> Would you say, then, that an Inquisitor and a Ranger in the same party might be redundant?




If you're out in the wilderness lots, the Ranger might be "best", but really, having both in the same party is redundant.

GP


----------



## Twowolves (Jun 3, 2010)

Herobizkit said:


> Would you say, then, that an Inquisitor and a Ranger in the same party might be redundant?






I wouldn't call the Ranger "redundant", more like "useless", or "5th-wheel-ish", or if describing the player of said ranger, "bored".


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Jun 4, 2010)

Twowolves said:


> To me, it looks like a divine ranger +++.
> 
> As in "I can do anything a ranger can do, better".




Well, they suck at melee. But, yeah ranged combat pretty much belongs to the Inquisitor as is. I haven't had a chance to play one, but want to.


----------



## gamerprinter (Jun 6, 2010)

Darkwolf71 said:


> Well, they suck at melee. But, yeah ranged combat pretty much belongs to the Inquisitor as is. I haven't had a chance to play one, but want to.





Good point, I'd rather be a ranger in a close up fight, than an inquisitor who is limited to simple weapons, which is very limited for combat, as is their lesser BAB. If I'm lost in the woods, I'd rather have a ranger in the party than an inquisitor.


----------



## MerrikCale (Jun 6, 2010)

Herobizkit said:


> I'm not a big fan of the fluff, but being fluff, I can always change it.




I love the fluff

The mechanic is interesting. The whole divine bard thing is cool. I might have given it some more weapon choices since it is a "monster hunter" kind of class.


----------



## Dhalgrath (Apr 24, 2011)

You might be forgetting the deity favored weapons. I have to take a look at what they are, but it could push the class beyond simple weapons and add more bite to their melee ability.


----------



## Dingo333 (Apr 24, 2011)

With any luck, I can tell you how the inquisitor plays next saturday.

Where we left off was, 3 trolls, me sitting in front of 2, and with 50 hp left, I dont expect that character to survive the encounter. He was an Urban ranger (well, still is for another week)

I have an inquisitor waiting in the wings (11th, Cayden Cailean, 2 weapon, elf)

As for weapons, they get bows, crossbows, and some nice favored weapons, plus race can add some nice additional ones. I feel 2 weapon best supports the judgments as they kinda want as many as possible attacks, (justice, destruction) and basing off dex, you have better AC, even with limit to medium armor (mithral breast plate win). In effect, you only need 2 abilities, Wis and Dex (mid con and cha, low int and str). You will almost always be first, have good AC, decent social, judgement makes up for str, wisdom and intelligence on monster checks (has 2 ranks in each, to ID monsters: +20).

Still debating between ranged or melee, going melee for now because my weapons are vicious and merciful (+3d6 to enemies, nonlethal, 1d6 to self) and the healing judgement will heal equal amount of nonlethal and lethal. At this point, hitting with all 4 attacks means 20d6+36 damage, and 4d6 to self. Fast healing 4 with judgement (destruction added into above). If I have flames of the faithful up add 2d6 fire and 2d10 on a crit (with a keen rapier no less)


----------



## Celtavian (Apr 24, 2011)

*re*

I'm playing a melee Inquisitor of Gorum right now. So I can tell you they are overpowered from a DM perspective. I haven't even tricked out my items yet, I'm already the hammer. My DM refers to me as "The Clean Up" man because the melees soften up the enemy we fight, then I bring down the hammer of death.

The Inquisitor's spell selection is what pushes them over the top. They have a lot of neat abilities as is and then they get a spell selection like no melee class I've seen save for multiclass characters.

I put my main stat in str and wisdom. We're not point buy, so I have better than 15 point stats. Which probably helps a great deal. But I went with melee to take advantage of spells like _Divine Power_ and _Righteous Might_ which don't work with ranged weapons.

The stacking modifiers are insane. 

As an Inquisitor of Gorum I took the Rage (Destruction) Subdomain. So I get destructive smite and the ability to rage like a barbarian for +4 str and con when I feel like it. I plan to take Reckless Abandon and either superstition or moment of clarity. Not sure yet.

I get good fort and will saves. Once I get stalwart and a ring of evasion, I'll take no damage or effect if I make a save of any kind. Once I get the Duck and Cover teamwork feat, I can take the roll of one of my comrades for reflex saves which improves my chances of succeeding.

And I have a 20 str right now for +7 damage with my +1 vicious greatsword. So my damage per attack once buffed with judgment up looks like this.

2d6 +7 str +1 weapon +3 luck divine favor +2 bane+2d6 bane+2d6vicous+4 judgment+6 power attack= 6d6+23 (+27 with destructive smite) for an average of 44 to 48 per hit.

This is without raging. And it's only going to get sicker as I get _Divine Power_, _Righteous Might_ and perhaps toss in _Wrath_ or something of that kind and add magic items.


On top of this, I get Greater Bane soon which will increase my bane damage to 4d6.

If I'm flanking I get an additional +4 to hit and +1d6 damage.

I can detect any alignment. I have sickening Sense Motive and Intimdate skill. Heck, maybe I should get Dazzling Display just to take advantage of my crazy intimidate skill.

I get nifty spells like:

_See Invisibility_
_Invisibility Purge_
_Lesser Restoration_
_Remove Paralysis_
_Invisiblity_
_Bless_
_Dispel Magic_


I can innately _Discern Lies_.

I have a +7 natural initiative bonus.

I get 6 skill points a lvl.

I'm human so I'm using my human lvl bonus to add to my spell list.

And I get d8 hit points a lvl.

The Inquisitor class is big fun. Very tough class. Great at any role it be standing back and supporting the group or wading in hammering. It's enjoyable to play a class that has something to do in every aspect of the game from combat to social interaction.

I can even track as an added bonus. I have the most knowledge skills in my group. Often more than even the wizard types. Very fun class. But in all honesty, they get way too much. There isn't another class in the game that gets as much as the Inquisitor.

I even get _Heal_ and _Harm_ on my spell list. It's pretty crazy. I can think of no other class as self-sufficient as the Inquisitor.


----------



## Varthol (Apr 24, 2011)

*re*

I've haven't looked much into the Inquisitor but I think the fluff is really nice.

My brother and I agree that a nice inquisitor archetype would probably be the guy from Assassin's Creed. A person privileged by the organization he serves for "darker than average" missions in terms of morality, who is however mainly driven/commanded by his faith and his own will rather than just a lord or money.


----------



## gamerprinter (Apr 25, 2011)

I'm working on an Inquisitor organization that serves the Shogunate of Kaidan, as the *Metsuki* - which in feudal Japan was the Shogunate Secret Police. A quite evil organization of quite evil inquisitors in search of heresy and traitors to the empire and shogunate.

While their reputation has been kept mostly secret, they were as ruthless, if not more so than the Spanish or Catholic Inquisition.

Of course, nobody expects the Shogun's Inquisition!


GP


----------



## Kvantum (Apr 25, 2011)

Celtavian said:


> I'm playing a melee Inquisitor of Gorum right now. So I can tell you they are overpowered from a DM perspective. I haven't even tricked out my items yet, I'm already the hammer. My DM refers to me as "The Clean Up" man because the melees soften up the enemy we fight, then I bring down the hammer of death.
> 
> The Inquisitor's spell selection is what pushes them over the top. They have a lot of neat abilities as is and then they get a spell selection like no melee class I've seen save for multiclass characters.
> 
> ...



Go Half-Orc, take the alternate favored class ability, and end up with an absurd Intimidate check on top of all that. Even with a 12 Cha, if you have Skill Focus (Intimidate) and Intimidating Prowess, if you max out Intimidate as a 7th level Inquisitor Half-Orc, you'd have 7 +3 class skill +1 Cha +2 racial +3 Skill Focus +5 Str (Intimidating Prowess) +3 Inquisitor Bonus +3 Half-Orc alternate class bonus = +27 as your base modifier to any check. FEAR ME!

Make sure you have Weapon Focus (Greatsword) and Dazzling Display, and nothing vulnerable to Intimidate will ever pose a serious threat to you.


----------



## Celtavian (Apr 25, 2011)

*re*

I already went human. I find the extra spells are better than the half-orc racial. Inquisitors have a great spell list. I like having a big spell list to choose from.


----------



## Hitman187 (Jun 20, 2011)

+x spells known> +x/2 on intimidate checks, when comparing human vs half-orc, especially since intimidate is the easiest skill checks in my opinion, being that our DM will add modifiers upon what we say or do, and my character has no qualms torturing for information.


As Celtavian mentioned earlier a physical inquisitor can become broken with damage and fast.


Compared to a ranger, i believe inquisitors are by far superior unless the entire campaign is based on a rangers favored enemy and in their favored terrain.


----------



## Stereofm (Jun 20, 2011)

My inquisitors kick ass, thank you !

Thing is, I multiclassed into rogue. I maxed the init. Now, I have initiative, I move within 30 feet while the opposition is not moving yet, and ...

I WASTE THEM WITH MY X-BOW !!!! HUZZAHHH !!!

And by that time I am inside their lines, I have my judgement of healing running, and their spellcasters are already hurt plenty...


----------



## Viktyr Gehrig (Jun 21, 2011)

I don't like Teamwork feats, and they seem to be a major portion of the Inquisitor's functionality.


----------



## Dingo333 (Jun 21, 2011)

Viktyr Korimir said:


> I don't like Teamwork feats, and they seem to be a major portion of the Inquisitor's functionality.




I am not a fan of them either

It does help though that they are changable mid combat, and only you needs the feat to get the bonus

I just picked up Outflank and Precise Strike and don't care about the rest

As for how my inquisitor is going, the DM just hands me the list of things we should be fighting that day, and tells me to look them up

2 weapon is working out well and we have taken "prisoners" to question (Diety is Cayden Cailen so I cant really take prisoners). I am the one who knocks them out then questions them. And with the +10 to movement and dimensional hop from the travel domain and +12 to Inititive, I find the BBEG and knock him out while everyone works on line 1 of the enemy defences

Yes the ranger in the group is feeling redundant BTW


----------

