• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Classes in the APG

Inquisitor really intrigued me at first, but upon extensive reading, I came to realize that it can't actually function. (...) I really like archery and I was very interested in Inquisitor at first, so sorry for the wordy review, but it was just a huge letdown.

I absolutely agree. I just wrote up a Level 6 INQ using longbows for a Ravenloft game my DM is running, and the result was ... disappointing, to say the least. Base damage is pitiful; you have the chance to drastically increase that damage by going all-out with active judgment, bane ability and spell(s), but especially on low levels, this works for a very short time (and even so, the damage doesn't compare to that of an archery-specialized ranger or fighter). Sure, you have more versatility by using spells, but they are mostly minor self-buffs that make you waste an action to marginally increase Atk or Dmg, but if you want a decent chance to actually do damage, in the end you have to be continuously 'buffed'.

Granted, I rolled up a dwarf inquisitor, so there was some optimization potential left unused (human or elf would have worked better, for example), but the basic problem is the class design.

If you play it as a melee class, the Paladin is going to be the 'better' Inquisitor.
As a ranged character, you suffer from lack of feats and basically useless Teamwork feats. (Also, why exactly does an INQ get them in the first place? Because he's better at teamwork than everyone else? Only, not. Because he can solo them. Uh ...)

If you try to play it as a support class/caster, it *might* work, but only if all core roles are already filled. It can't stand on its own.

Witches and oracles, OTOH, work very well as written.

No experience so far with Alchemists or Cavaliers.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Funny how one class is weak to one group and strong to others. We fought a BBEG who was an inquisitor of the god of loss in golarion zon something forget the name. Anyhow between the two teamwork feats thatbadd +2 to cmd and cmb respectively improved trip inquisitor self buffing darkness domain ability to see in the dark for limited time she was brutal.

I haven't seen one as a pc yet though
 

Funny how one class is weak to one group and strong to others. We fought a BBEG who was an inquisitor of the god of loss in golarion zon something forget the name. Anyhow between the two teamwork feats thatbadd +2 to cmd and cmb respectively improved trip inquisitor self buffing darkness domain ability to see in the dark for limited time she was brutal.

I haven't seen one as a pc yet though

Having +2 CMD and CMB is like...being a full BAB class. Far from enough to make one powerful on its own.

Inquisitor can do ok for one or two fights with the judgement uses, but that's more useful to an NPC than a PC. Darkness + darkvision is a neat trick, but pretty easy to pull off. A cleric could have done it; I did it with my short lived Tiefling Rogue PC once/day to good effect (racial 1/day Darkness spell and racial darkvision; there's other monster manual playable races with both).

I'd guess that encounter was hard due to a combination of:
1) a nifty trick you guys weren't prepared for, but one that's far from exclusive to Inquisitor
2) the Inquisitor was probably higher level than you
3) the Inquisitor blew as many of her daily resources as possible into that one fight
 

It was deeper darkness. But I suppose point proven. The chain fighting inquisitor dropped it on us in a 20x20 room with one exit. Though there seem to be a lot of ways to raise your cmd as an inquisitor from cleric spells to sacred bonuses to ac.

But your right a lot of this makes for I'm really tough for one encounter which makes for a strong npc burn not so much pc.
 

re

Oracle: Nicely designed class. Can truly take over the healer roll with minimal loss of efficiency and even surpass the cleric as a Life Mystery healer. Lots of nice options. Makes you wish the sorcerer bloodlines were designed like Oracle mysteries. Same spell selection as a cleric. Each mystery has nice options. Though Battle, Life, and Heavens are pretty strong standouts.

Curse is interesting flavor as well as providing interesting abilities. I chose the Deafness curse. That goes a long way to protect against spells like Blasphemy, Charm, and the like. I like being able to cast all my spells without speaking. Since you don't need a Divine Focus either. You cast your spells with material and somatic components only. As a Life Oracle I will have scent, tremorsense, and blindsight that works for living creatures. So she will be very hard to sneak up on. It's funny that the deaf girl will be the hardest to hide or stealth on at high level.

Witch: The class looks interresting. I've specced out some witches. They can do some cool stuff. I think they stand on their own against the other caster classes. Excellent spell list mixed in with some spells uncommon for an arcane caster like healing spells and Death Ward.

The hexes give some nice powers. Flight, Cackle, and Agony look pretty nice. And Grand Hex Life Giver seems pretty powerful. You can ressurect someone with no material component once a day. That's pretty cool.

Very comparable, balanced option to other classes.

Summoner: Not sure this class can replace an arcane caster. I look at this class as more capable of replacing a secondary melee class like a rogue, monk, or ranger. AoE damage options are pretty week. Not a great many direct damage options either. And weakened spell DCs since your spell level maxes out at 6th lvl. Spell list is fairly limited.

If you wanted to make a secondary melee class, this could be an interesting way to go about it. You can build a pretty tough Eidolon that does some nice damage. Focus on buffing it and keeping it healed and you're like a melee mage.

If your Eidlolon goes down, you can summon some creatures to continue fighting. Toss in Augment Summoning and even your summons are pretty tough.

I have a hard time seeing this class shine against BBEG. But I haven't seen it played at high level. But from what I can tell, this class is definitely a melee replacement and not an arcane caster replacement unless you want to give up energy damage spells and a lot of direct killing effect spells.

I think the Summoner can be interesting and fun if you can adapt to the playstyle, which takes more thought than a standard arcane caster.


Inquisitor: This class requires thinking against what is naturally encouraged. Though many of your abilities are wisdom focused, it is better to focus on strength for this class if you want to be able to deal damage as well as other secondary melee classes.

It seems to encourage a ranged build. Which as others have pointed out is feat intensive and you get no bonus feats other than teamwork feats which don't benefit a ranged attacker. I found a Power Attack build best for this class, preferably with a Two-handed weapon.

The spell list isn't bad. I would focus on self-buff spells with maybe an occasional heal or utility recovery spell thrown in.

This class is also a slow build class. It doesn't look very great at low levels. It isn't comparable to other secondary melee classes like the monk or rogue in damage or the bard or summoner in utility.

But once you start getting some levels, this class can do some nice things. You do eventually get Righteous Might and Divine Power. If you have a strength-based build with those spells on and maybe a rage and the Destruction Domain with the Destruction/Justice judgments up and Bane going, you can do some damage. But that's at a minimum 13th level to get that combo going. Prior to that you're definitely going to lag behind the other classes in damage.

But you do offer some unique utility. You will be able to figure out quite a few monster weaknesses. You have some decent backup spells that might help during battle like Remove Fear and Remove Paralysis. It's real hard to fool you or lie to you with all Detect Alignments and Discern lies.

This class is conceptually cool. But seems a bit lacking compared to other classes that may fit the same role until you get to 12th or 13th level. Which not too many groups get to. It's hard to recommend the class if you like seeing more bang for your buck at lower level or rarely get past 8th to 10th level.


Some nice class options:

1. Invulnerable Rager: This is a power option for barbarians. You can make a sick build for damage dealing and taking damage using this option.

2. Two-hander Fighter: This is the premier damage dealer in the game. This build hammers harder than any other build all the time. No special circumstances needed. Just rush forward and hammer with your big two-handed weapon.

3. Zen Archer Monk: Not as much damage as an Archer fighter all the time. But still a very capable archer with some nice abilities. And can spike damage high enough to come close to fighter archer.

4. Hungry Ghost Monk: Vampiric monk. This path could be very nasty. Constant flow of temporary hit points in battle. With as high as monk AC/CMD is, this could make for a very hard to kill monk.


Lots of cool new rage powers. Some cool new rogue talents.

Rogue is still incredibly lacking compared to other classes. Still the easiest to kill or neutralize with low fort and will save. Still lacks abilities as interesting or potent as other classes save for sneak attack. Doesn't hit as often as melees, doesn't offer the utility of secondary melee classes.

And doesn't have very cool paths in the Advanced Player's Guide. Maybe someday someone will make an interesting rogue that people in my group want to play.
 

If you wanted to make a secondary melee class, this could be an interesting way to go about it. You can build a pretty tough Eidolon that does some nice damage. Focus on buffing it and keeping it healed and you're like a melee mage.

If your Eidlolon goes down, you can summon some creatures to continue fighting. Toss in Augment Summoning and even your summons are pretty tough.

I'm playing in a game at level 3 with a Summoner right now, and this seems correct, at least for now. The Eidolon basically IS the PC, and he does ok grapling things and tanking. The actual summoner has yet to do anything in combat other than summon more stuff or buff/heal the eidolon. Could just be player's choice in how to do things, or the optimal playstyle, not sure.



This class is also a slow build class. It doesn't look very great at low levels. It isn't comparable to other secondary melee classes like the monk or rogue in damage or the bard or summoner in utility.

But once you start getting some levels, this class can do some nice things. You do eventually get Righteous Might and Divine Power. If you have a strength-based build with those spells on and maybe a rage and the Destruction Domain with the Destruction/Justice judgments up and Bane going, you can do some damage. But that's at a minimum 13th level to get that combo going. Prior to that you're definitely going to lag behind the other classes in damage.

But you do offer some unique utility. You will be able to figure out quite a few monster weaknesses. You have some decent backup spells that might help during battle like Remove Fear and Remove Paralysis. It's real hard to fool you or lie to you with all Detect Alignments and Discern lies.

This class is conceptually cool. But seems a bit lacking compared to other classes that may fit the same role until you get to 12th or 13th level. Which not too many groups get to. It's hard to recommend the class if you like seeing more bang for your buck at lower level or rarely get past 8th to 10th level.

It does have some unique abilities, like being a pokedex (monster lore) and stealth (without any mechanic to make it very useful for the class other than actual recon, which in D&D too often tends to get the scout killed...), but those are minor party roles. You say it can be ok as a melee class, I think there's at least half a dozen classes better at it than that, including druid and cleric, if you want casting.

I will say, I did like the concept of an archer Inquisitor with the Caves (Earth) subdoman. The pit spels, already hilarious and effective, are a step nicer when you have a good ranged attack to pelt people trapped in it with. More importantly, the granted power is amazing if you go in a lot of dungeon environments (should be a lot of groups...). (Better) Darkvision! Spider Climb (if only it was like the slippers so you could shoot the bow while on walls/ceiling :( )! Stealth bonuses, and add your wisdom to Initiative twice! On top of Dex!

Cool uses for a sniper archer, though in a similar vein to what you said, the magic doesn't even come until 8th level.


2. Two-hander Fighter: This is the premier damage dealer in the game. This build hammers harder than any other build all the time. No special circumstances needed. Just rush forward and hammer with your big two-handed weapon.

It hits the hardest, but I like Mobile Fighter better. Since they still get Weapon Training 2-4 (so an eventual +3 with one weapon) AND Leaping Attack for a basically constant +1-5, it adds up late game. And Mobile Fighter's just cool with all the move and attack options.
I'd really love to make a Mobile Fighter with a reach weapon and Whirlwind Attack, depending on how the DM interprets WWA as working with the level 11 Rapid Attack.

3. Zen Archer Monk: Not as much damage as an Archer fighter all the time. But still a very capable archer with some nice abilities. And can spike damage high enough to come close to fighter archer.

Just finished playing one from levels 3-8, alongside an archer ranger (it was like an 8 person party, lots of overlap). My Zen Archer held up well, was just as good at attacking and did slightly better damage. I could get off more shots per round with ki points and by level 8 i just plain had more attacks. He was horribly feat starved, I actually only spent my level 3 feat on something arhcery-related (Deadly Aim), the rest there was nothing very good beyond what the massive amounts of bonus feats covered so I ended up with Dodge, Deflect Arrows, and Spider Step (for coolness). I think 3-10 if the Zen archer's definite sweet spot. Level 1 is godawful, and also SHAME on Paizo for not changing the Zen Archer monk's starting gold. When you focus on BOWS, you need a tad bit more cash than the regular unarmed monk. Past level 10, the bonus feat options just aren't very good and you stop getting particularly good class features. Really, past level 6, I'd gladly trade every single Zen Archer variant class feature for the normal stuff, even things that don't at all benefit archery. Level 17 might be a sudden jump in power since you can then Stunning Fist, Touch of Serenity, etc... from your bow. But by then you're probably too far behind the Fighter and casters for it to matter. I think in the long run, the Ranger's spellcasting, extra actions (animal companion), and earlier feat qualification (having real full BAB instead of pretend ful BAB is nice) would have pulled him decisively ahead of me.
In conclusion: Nice class for the middle levels to not worry about feats, would NOT recommend for a higher level game.

Rogue is still incredibly lacking compared to other classes. Still the easiest to kill or neutralize with low fort and will save. Still lacks abilities as interesting or potent as other classes save for sneak attack. Doesn't hit as often as melees, doesn't offer the utility of secondary melee classes.

Yeah...I think Rogues got worse in PF, sadly. I started the game with the Zen Archer at levels 1-2 with a Thug Rogue but had ot dump him because he just wasn't good at anything. Even with TWF the Fighter easily outdamaged him (and he sure did hit more often!). I tried to do a Intimiadte focus for flavor and to help the casters, but got disappointed when I realized the sorcerer and bard, through sheer charisma score, could trounce me at it. Thanks to PF's skill system, non-class skills aren't particularly punitive or pricy to get ranks in, so my many class skills mostly just meant I had a lot of one point wonders. It was a large party, granted, but i don't think there was a single skill I could have focused on and been significantly better at it than anyone else. Meanwhile, squishy AC and the worst saves in the game don't help.
I'm thinking of houseruling some sort of Skill Superiority class feature, similar to Fighter's Weapon Training for Rogues. Something like +1 per 3 Rogue levels, and it applies to one skill selected at each 3rd level (so at level 6, you could have +2 stealth and acrobatics, for example). Just...something to help. Nevermind other things they need, like "you can sneak attack against all but total concealment."

And doesn't have very cool paths in the Advanced Player's Guide. Maybe someday someone will make an interesting rogue that people in my group want to play.

I sort of like the Rake and Thug paths, though they're slim in what they change.
 

Funny how one class is weak to one group and strong to others. We fought a BBEG who was an inquisitor of the god of loss in golarion zon something forget the name. Anyhow between the two teamwork feats thatbadd +2 to cmd and cmb respectively improved trip inquisitor self buffing darkness domain ability to see in the dark for limited time she was brutal.

I haven't seen one as a pc yet though

How something acts as a foe never really applies to how it works as a PC. A foe, designed to fight one battle then flee or die can throw out every single once per day ability and not really care how much he is gimped for the rest of the day.

This only applies to a player character if your DM is very lazy or accomodating and lets the party go all out then rest, rinse and repeat, as often as they want to.
 

Rogues are the suck

Just finished playing one from levels 3-8, alongside an archer ranger (it was like an 8 person party, lots of overlap). My Zen Archer held up well, was just as good at attacking and did slightly better damage. I could get off more shots per round with ki points and by level 8 i just plain had more attacks. He was horribly feat starved, I actually only spent my level 3 feat on something arhcery-related (Deadly Aim), the rest there was nothing very good beyond what the massive amounts of bonus feats covered so I ended up with Dodge, Deflect Arrows, and Spider Step (for coolness). I think 3-10 if the Zen archer's definite sweet spot. Level 1 is godawful, and also SHAME on Paizo for not changing the Zen Archer monk's starting gold. When you focus on BOWS, you need a tad bit more cash than the regular unarmed monk. Past level 10, the bonus feat options just aren't very good and you stop getting particularly good class features. Really, past level 6, I'd gladly trade every single Zen Archer variant class feature for the normal stuff, even things that don't at all benefit archery. Level 17 might be a sudden jump in power since you can then Stunning Fist, Touch of Serenity, etc... from your bow. But by then you're probably too far behind the Fighter and casters for it to matter. I think in the long run, the Ranger's spellcasting, extra actions (animal companion), and earlier feat qualification (having real full BAB instead of pretend ful BAB is nice) would have pulled him decisively ahead of me.
In conclusion: Nice class for the middle levels to not worry about feats, would NOT recommend for a higher level game.

That's too bad. My friend is playing a Zen Archer. I think he will be disappointed as the Two-hander Fighter and Invulnerable Rager barbarian come into their own.



Yeah...I think Rogues got worse in PF, sadly. I started the game with the Zen Archer at levels 1-2 with a Thug Rogue but had ot dump him because he just wasn't good at anything. Even with TWF the Fighter easily outdamaged him (and he sure did hit more often!). I tried to do a Intimiadte focus for flavor and to help the casters, but got disappointed when I realized the sorcerer and bard, through sheer charisma score, could trounce me at it. Thanks to PF's skill system, non-class skills aren't particularly punitive or pricy to get ranks in, so my many class skills mostly just meant I had a lot of one point wonders. It was a large party, granted, but i don't think there was a single skill I could have focused on and been significantly better at it than anyone else. Meanwhile, squishy AC and the worst saves in the game don't help.
I'm thinking of houseruling some sort of Skill Superiority class feature, similar to Fighter's Weapon Training for Rogues. Something like +1 per 3 Rogue levels, and it applies to one skill selected at each 3rd level (so at level 6, you could have +2 stealth and acrobatics, for example). Just...something to help. Nevermind other things they need, like "you can sneak attack against all but total concealment."

Sounds like a good idea.

I house ruled the rogue to have good Fort Save. And we gave trapfinding to Bards, Inquisitors, and Rangers. We felt like Paizo Pathfinder held onto the old idea that only rogues can find magical traps. I find the decision to be short-sighted on Paizo's part.

Paizo needs to give up on the rogue, sneaky trapfinder guy and make it an equivalent secondary melee or support class like the monk, bard, and inquisitor. And stop pigeon-holing groups so they have to have a rogue to find traps and for no other reason. And give he rogue too good saves finally for the love all that his holy. The bard, rogue, inquisitor, and monk all have two or more good saves. Why is Paizo hanging on to a sacred cow like one good save for the rogue? Makes people want to play them even less because of how easily neutralized or killed they are.

The rogue should be designed with the idea of making it as fun to play and equivalent in ability as rangers, bards, inquisitors, and monks. Making rogues the only Trapfinding class has made Paizo and D&D in general lazy when designing the rogue class. It's like they say, "We'll make rogues the only trapfinder, so someone will have to play one", rather than making rogues stand on their own as a class at low and high level.

I know my experience with rogues at high level is they are almost always running from fear, getting held, mind-controlled, destroyed by the fort attack spells or effects monstes use, poisoned, diseased, and just all around getting their behinds handed to them in brutal higher level encounters. The cleric and caster support has to focus on keeping the low will save fighters clean, so the rogue becomes a secondary concern because if the fighter goes down the party is dead.

Sure rogues occasionally shine if they get off a nice run of sneak attacks. But they often still pale the fighter, barbarians, and the like as damage dealers and die far, far easier due to lower hit points, lower fort and will saves, and being the guy who handles traps and scouts in front. Often meaning one bad save or missed perception check leaves them in a bad way. Thus no one in my group plays a single class rogue because we get past lvl 10 most of the time. Once you get to high level, the gap in power between the rogue and other classes really begins to show itself as DMs design monsters with ACs and defenses to challenge amped up fighters, paladins, and barbarians making a rogue pale in comparison to them.

Rogue is poorly designed. I get arguments from people that they are fine and do the most damage in the group. All I can say to those people is they must play with players who make poor design decisions when it comes to class construction.

Because I know for a fact right now that a barbarian invulnerable rager could destroy the best played and designed rogue in straight up combat without breaking a sweat. So could a well-designed arcane caster. A fighter. A ranger. A paladin. A cleric. Just about any class in the game could make a rogue look like a total chump.

No class should be that poorly designed where he needs other players to the degree the rogue does set up his one shining ability sneak attack. If the rogue waits for the two-weapon fighter to set up his sneak attack, the two-handed fighter has probably already killed the enemy the rogue was waiting to attack. Same with the smiting paladin or raging two-hander barbarian or the flurrying monk.

Rogue is a poorly designed class. And will only shine in the weakest, most poorly designed parties. Until Paizo Pathfinder designs a better rogue class, I won't force my players to play one. Thus expanding trapfinding and giving the rogue good fort save in the hope someone might try one.

But I doubt it. Rogue is too dependent on other classes to shine, mostly other melee classes. And other me melee classes do so much damage now, they will kill what the rogue was hitting before he gets a chance to shine.
 


re

So how does the Cavalier do, all in all?

Read it over a bunch of times. Seems like it could be cool in a certain type of campaign that required a lot of mounted combat. Since average campaigns don't have that, seems like a melee that will pale in comparison to fighters, paladins, barbarians, monks, and rangers. Abilities with too many limiting factors don't stand up well against abilities with less limitations or less restrictive limitations.

Cavalier has too many abilities tied to being mounted or ally or situation requirements when it comes to orders. And none of the abilities are better than the other melee classes, most aren't even equivalent.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top