Why is the Inquisitor bad?

[Elric VIII]

I'm interested in a discussion about the Inquisitor. I've been playing 3.5 for years now, so I do have a good baseline for judging viability of certain mechanics. However, in my first PF game I showed up with an Inquisitor only to be told by the players that it was a bad class (with no real reasoning given). I proceeded to do fairly well with a melee Enforcer/Bludgeoner/Hurtful build while contributing sufficiently out of combat, as well.

In a game that I started recently I expressed interest in playing an Inquisitor, since my last one ended abruptly at level 7, but I was once again met with "Inquisitor is bad."

Additionally, I have seen this said in various forum posts as well. To me, an Inquisitor looks very much like a combat Bard in its execution. So why does the class get a bad reputation?

[Frosty]

People say the inquisitor is bad? Isn't it tied 3? Neither stupidly high damage potential to boot?

I'd love to play one some time

[Kurald Galain]

I didn't expect that!

[RolkFlameraven]

Can't say I've seen someone say that before. They are a bit more selfish then a bard but can more then hold there own.

What was the rest of the table running? Because this sounds like an inverse monk thing. They glance at the class and think 'man, this sucks' without really looking at what the class can really do.

The BAB and 'teamwork feats' could turn them off if they don't pay attention to the self buffs and solo tactics.

[Psyren]

Inquisitor has far higher damage potential than bard, especially at range. Bane, Judgment, Litany spells, and Solo Tactics give them a lot of combat options. They also have hand crossbow proficiency and proficiency with their deity's favored weapon.

[Geddy2112]

Inquisitor is bad? Maybe compared to a godcaster wizard... does your group only play full casting classes and shun anything else? Cause yes, an inquisitor is no match for a T1 magic monster, but is a solid tier 3. I have never heard anybody say the inquisitor is bad. They have shortcomings-sure. They are not as good at other classes-certainly. They have a lot of trap builds-yeah, but lots of classes do. Never that they are outright bad.

Your gaming group either does not know what they are talking about, or shuns anything that can't break the game and world at will.

Then again, I have heard stranger things, like how rogues were the best class in the game.

[Kudaku]

In my experience most forum users love the inquisitor and with good reason, it's a great class. That said, it's not necessarily readily apparent why it's a great class, at least not until you actually see it in play. I suspect part of it is that there's no singular class-defining mechanic like Spell Combat or Rage, instead it gets lots of relatively small class features that interact really well with each other.

[Beowulf DW]

The Inquisitor is a truly flexible class. Skills, party support, casting, ranged dpr, frontline combat, social combat...The Inquisitor can lean any number of ways as far as builds go without sacrificing too much in other areas. Perhaps even more so than the Bard, the Inquisitor is a stop-gap class: you can fill any role you need to.

[Barstro]

So why does the class get a bad reputation?

Never heard that it did. The party I'm in thinks my ranged Inquisitor is rather overpowered.

At level 10, without too much trouble (and standard equipment for his level), he is attacking 19/19/14 for 1d8+2d6+15 per arrow from the second round onward. That is without any spells or buffs from other members (just Judgement and Bane). In fact, he'd have an extra arrow from Many Shot at 19 to hit if I hadn't been tired of surpassing the rest of the party and taken a more useless Feat.

He's no tier 1, but he is far from bad. I also think (without any testing to prove it) that a melee version would be even better, as there are more useful Teamwork Feats available.

I wonder if your party just isn't used to the Inquisitor's mechanics and cannot see how strong they become.

[AlignmentDebate]

I've never heard anyone say it's bad. My game has an Inquistor mowing everything down with a bow.

[Frosty]

Barstro, where is the flat +15 coming from? That's a huge static bonus...

[Barstro]

Barstro, where is the flat +15 coming from? That's a huge static bonus...

Good, now I have people skeptical enough to make sure i am correct. Hope I am.
+2 STR from Composite Bow
+2 Greater Magic Weapon at +2
+1 Point Blank Shot
+4 Deadly Aim
+2 Bane Weapon (Bane started after second round)
+4 Judgement (Begun first round of combat)

EDIT: It's also very easy (I chose bracers) to get critical at 19/20 x3
The Inquisitor gets a sizable bonus to confirm criticals

[Kurald Galain]

Barstro, where is the flat +15 coming from? That's a huge static bonus...

Well, high strength plus rage plus power attack nets you a +12 at level 1, so having a +15 at level 10 shouldn't be surprising.

[gartius]

i think i can break it down

+4 from deadly aim
+2 from bane
+4 from destruction judgement

then a combination of point blankshot, strength, and a basic magic weapon

surprisingly it also multiclasses well with zen archer monk (i ended up having a inquisitor that used wisdom for everything bar damage and hit points)

[Segev]

It may behoove you to ask, in all earnestness, what is underpowered about it. What weaknesses does it have (according to your tablemates) that you should be aware of when you're building it?

[13ones]

I have encounted a similar experience within my own circle of friends. For years they have said that the Rogue and Inquisitor were easily two of the weakest classes in the game, when compared to everything at the time [this was pre ACG]. Some would argue its merrits as not a weak class, just a good '6th or 7th man class'. So basically good to round out a party, but you'd rather LITERALLY anything else above them, even a Rogue.

Well then at this year's tournament we had our first Inquisitor enter playing a ranged style. And I'll say that quite a few people changed their minds when they saw the DPR he was bringing to the table. And when he totally made a joke out of a difficult encounter [It was basically two ghosts conducting a bunch of spirits in a dance while casting spells and an Inevitable who was doing a bunch of Dimensional Agility stuff] by stunning the two ghosts, no save.

I think it changed a lot of peoples minds. And as someone else correctly pointed out they have a lot of little mechanics that make them powerful as opposed to a big one like Bloodlines, Rage, Blessing, and the like. They are a lot of little moving parts that when used correctly can be devistating.

This particular Inquisitor made it into the alternate finals along side Two Summoners [one Master, one Base], A Swashbuckler, A Mystic Theurge, an Arcanist, A Blast Druid, and I think someone else... I can't remember. I feel like there was someone else I can't remember [The actual finals held Three Bloodragers, a Hunter, and a abomination mutli-class thing that was like part Bard part Stalward Defender.]

[Elric VIII]

Okay, this is more or less what I expected to hear. I just wondered if I was missing some glaring, truenamer-esque flaw in the class. Thanks for the discussion.

[(Un)Inspired]

Maybe they were using the word bad the way that people in the 90's used to say it?

[Kurald Galain]

Maybe they were using the word bad the way that people in the 90's used to say it?

Hmmm... could we make an Inq build based on Michael Jackson's record? Or is that more of a Bard thing? :smallamused:

[Andreaz]

why does the class get a bad reputation?It doesn't. It's one of the best classes out there.

[NightbringerGGZ]

Hmmm... could we make an Inq build based on Michael Jackson's record? Or is that more of a Bard thing? :smallamused:

Definately a Bard thing... and maybe inspiration for my next character! I'm still trying to settle on what I want to play in an upcoming RotRL game.

[Milo v3]

Inquisitor is generally considered a great class, because it's powerful, useful, and not overpowered.


I have encounted a similar experience within my own circle of friends. For years they have said that the Rogue and Inquisitor were easily two of the weakest classes in the game, when compared to everything at the time [this was pre ACG].

Admittedly that was true of the rogue.

[AnonymousPepper]

To be honest, Inquisitor is my personal favorite class to play that's not a full caster (or de facto full caster - see: artificer). It's just got so much that works so well, it's a masterfully-designed class and a perfect T3 - hell, I'd argue it's one of the rare T3s that might be able to break the barrier into T2.

[It Sat Rap]

I've played an Inquisitor in a campaign before, and this character was a beast! The damage output was very high, his defence was not so good, however. But overall he was a very mighty character, not bad by any means.

Maybe this group had a bad experience with an Inquisitor before. One player played a poorley created Inquisitor and didn't know how his abilities work, so the character was very weak. Now they think all Inquisitors are weak.

I wouldn't care if somebody tells me this class is weak, I would play it anyway and show them that they are wrong.

[Grim Reader]

In my 3.P game one of the characters was an Inquisitor. It was a very unoptimized group, with the Inquisitors player being completely new to the game. This resulted in the player being completely overwhelmed by the many options and abilities of the Inquisitor. However, there was enough stuff there that the player could normally contribute anyway.

My impression is that the Inquisitor is T3 with a particularly high floor. It can easily outshine a number of other classes at a low level of optimization.

[Barstro]

My impression is that the Inquisitor is T3 with a particularly high floor. It can easily outshine a number of other classes at a low level of optimization.

The main things I've noticed is;
Weapon gets a free +2 effect by getting Bane. This is already better than normal Bane because it can be altered depending on what you fight. At level 12, it causes even more damage than vanilla Bane.
Judgments allow for free switching of your build. You can easily add more to damage or saving throws with just a swift action instead of gold investment or feats that cannot be taken back.
This class actually benefits from otherwise worthless Teamwork Feats. Again, the Inquisitor can change a Teamwork Feat for free to adapt to the situation.

The Inquisitor is like the Bard in that he isn't the strongest class, but he's pretty good at everything while not having the weaknesses of other classes. If you consider a Bard to be 50% good at everything all the time, then I'd say the Inquisitor has the potential to be 75%-90% good at anything; he just needs two rounds to prepare (and will then be weaker at everything else for a little while).

[Da'Shain]

Inquisitor was actually the first PF class I played and I had a ton of fun with it. We even had two in that group, and we were different enough that it didn't feel too redundant (he optimized his intimidation and spellcasting while I optimized his melee combat and non-social skills), and we supported each other really well.

I haven't really played one since, because I try to play different classes in every game, but I remember that character with much fondness. It was an all-divine-caster party, and he certainly wasn't the weak link.

[sovin_ndore]

Hmmm... could we make an Inq build based on Michael Jackson's record? Or is that more of a Bard thing? :smallamused:
Bard/Necromancer = Thriller?

[Amphetryon]

Bard/Necromancer = Thriller?

To terrorize y'all's neighborhood.

[T.G. Oskar]

I have to join the chorus on it, and like you, I'm more of a 3.5 guy.

The Inquisitor isn't bad at all - if anything, it's only bad IF you don't look at what it offers in the same way you could see a Monk and think "wow, it's overpowered! It has way too many stuff!" The poor BAB is nothing when you consider that the vanilla Inquisitor has several ways to boost attack rolls - Justice Judgment, Bane class feature, the Wrath spell (easily one of the best spells around, and funny enough, a level 1 spell at that!), Divine Favor/Divine Power/Deadly Juggernaut, and others. Not only that, it also has a pretty heavy damage output, and most of that output is both static and easy to work with, so you can increase it with critical modifiers AND doesn't involve setting up the opponent to do all that damage (like the Rogue). Since it's not limited by range, you can easily snipe the opponent, or use your high attack bonus alongside TWF (though note that the damage is lessened because of how the Bane class feature doesn't apply to both weapons unless you get a feat).

On the other hand, it can also contribute a lot outside of combat. Inquisitors have one of the best Intimidate bonuses, if only because of Stern Gaze. They can help identify monsters via Monster Lore, and they can also do great trackers because of the Track class feature. That's two skills and one entire cluster of skills in which they excel, and that's not including their naturally high access to skills, so they're skillmonkeys in that regard. They're also hardy, what with medium armor, shields and good Hit Dice. Since they use Wisdom, and Constitution is often good, they also have rockin' Fortitude and Will saves, and with a good amount of Dex, they can also have a decent Reflex save. In other words, they're great offensively, defensively and out of combat. Oh yeah, and they're also really fast - Cunning Initiative lets you add another high score to your Initiative, meaning you'll most likely go first, period.

Then we get to spells. I'm kinda conflicted in how Paizo loves the Inquisitor chassis, as it also uses it for the Magus - then again, it worked for 3.5's Psychic Warrior, and the Inquisitor does fit the idea of less of a martial character and more of a "divine Bard", except it's not a divine Bard at all. It's an "operative of the Faith", part assassin, part spy and part Internal Affairs. Get that straight, and you'll see how everything clicks.

Thus, it's weird to hear why the Inquisitor is so bad. What I'm saying is mostly from the realm of theorycrafting, but it can be supported with data from real tables, so it's not like it's entirely unsupported. The only support you could have from the "Inquisitor is bad" side is that the player didn't play the Inquisitor as it should, and that's not exactly easy to achieve. It IS a complex class, and one where system mastery amply rewards the build, but even without enough system mastery you can get a pretty decent character, something hard to get with, say, 3.5's Samurai or Monk or Ninja. Then again, it's not as complex as, say, 3.5's Binder or Incarnate, where system mastery was necessary to draw the full extent of the character. Most likely, this is the reason - the people that say this are overwhelmed with the class' complexity to understand the finer points. That, or they try to play it as either a full caster (they're not; that's what the Cleric is for) or a full martial character (that's what the Fighter or Paladin is for), or they want to play more of a war-priest than a stealthy assassin guy (in which case, the Warpriest is perfect for them). In short: those who say the Inquisitor is bad are probably playing the class wrong, or playing the wrong class for their build.

[Giggling Ghast]

The Inquisitor is the only one who can close Fade Rif—

Wait, wrong game.

[Chromascope3D]

Or is that more of a Bard thing? :smallamused:

Yes. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/archetypes/paizo---bard-archetypes/dirge-bard)This space for rent.

[Raphite1]

You really just never know what senseless opinions people will hold.

A couple years ago I became friends with a woman who has been tabletop gaming for decades. We never played in the same group, and one day while we were talking it came up that in EVERY CAMPAIGN she had ever been in, she played a Fighter. Every character. I was kinda stunned, both because she had never tried anything else after so long, and because she had stuck with one of the absolute weakest classes. I asked her why she always played a fighter, and she said it was because they were the strongest class in the game, since they got so many feats.

In one of my groups, the other players have all been gaming for at least 10-15 years, often multiple times per week. They still consider Fireball to be the crux of caster power, with single-target save-or-die spells to be a close second. These folks also hated the Pathfinder ACG, saying that all the new classes were grossly overpowered. Sure, there were a couple T1s in there, but most seemed like solid mid-tiers.

[Beowulf DW]

The Inquisitor is the only one who can close Fade Rif—

Wait, wrong game.

There's a reason I like seeing your posts, Jack.:smallbiggrin:

[Ssalarn]

I haven't actually seen anyone calling the Inquisitor bad before. He's one of the best designed Tier 3 classes Paizo has to offer, with a lot of versatility, competence, and the ability to successfully fill multiple roles. Anger Inquisition or Rage Domain Inquisitors can throw down with the best melee classes, just about any Inquisitor is a solid skill-monkey, and they can do a decent job of covering heals if they need to. Solo Tactics lets them leverage Teamwork Feats to great effect, and their spell list is custom-tailored to emphasize their strengths.

Long story short, the Inquisitor is probably one of the better classes you could be playing.