Skip to content

Inquisitor is worthless in BG1

Aasimar069Aasimar069 Member Posts: 803
EDIT 2: Again, this is for BG1. BG2:EE is not out yet, and in this game, other choices have to be done.

I might league against myself the cult of Inquisitor worshipers, but let's face the facts.
In BG1, with a low level magic settings (and the way the mages are behaving), Inquisitors are currently useless.
I'm quite sure that the Inquisitor cult is composed mostly of people that have played BG2 before BG1 (and therefore do not know as well how BG1 mage encounters work).

Let's do the try with the Cavalier, who is best suited for the BG1 playstyle.

- Immunity to fear :

It is the most dreadful spell that mages age going to cast against you.
When you are under the spell effect, they will throw at you all their magic.
oh boy I don't care, I am immune !

EDIT : If my party members are loosing their save throw, I can cast remove fear on them !

- immunity to charm :

Sirins, some mages are casting Dire charm, charm, ... against you. I don't care !

- Immunity to poison:

Spiders, Wyverns, Ettercap, Poison Arrows from Hobgoblins Elite...
Poison is deadly on these levels, and, again, the Cavalier is immune to them.

- Resistance to fire and acid :

While acid damage is very scare, with the ring of fire protection, you can be immunized to fire damage.


The Cavalier can still use:
- Protection from evil
- lay on hands


On the other hand, the Inquisitor will get :

-Dispel on hit: only to dispel the poor mirror image (nothing that magic projectiles or a good archer can destroy).

- Magic dispelling spells (again, that will only dispel the following spells : protection from normal missiles, mirror image, lesser invulnerability globe).
Nothing that a priest can't do.

So currently, Cavalier kit is far more interesting than the inquisitor kit. This might be different with mods like SCS that are improving the mages AI, but, one a unmoded installation, Inquisitor brings only specific advantages against ennemies that are not at all powerful in this game.


Post edited by Aasimar069 on
«13

Comments

  • raywindraywind Member Posts: 289
    This all depends on your party. While i would agree if you would go solo with the game but in party that dispellig is better than some immunities, because if the enemy cant fear you he can fear you ally.
  • ElendarElendar Member Posts: 831
    edited December 2012
    raywind said:

    This all depends on your party. While i would agree if you would go solo with the game but in party that dispellig is better than some immunities, because if the enemy cant fear you he can fear you ally.

    Cavaliers do get Remove Fear as an ability, which can come quite in handy.. I think most people have done complete playthroughs with Tutu or BGT... in which the Inquisitor is more useful in the long run.

    To be fair, Inquisitors also get immunity to Charm and Hold....
  • raywindraywind Member Posts: 289
    I personally soloed the game with cavalier with dagger of venom keeping the mages busy BUT inquisitor would be better in my oppinion at least in party play through
  • QuartzQuartz Member Posts: 3,853
    Wait, you're directly comparing them to Cavaliers? Of course they look bad! Cavalier is a borderline broken kit, there is almost no point in taking the vanilla Paladin kit compared to Cavalier. It makes Undead Hunter look bad too.

    But no. Inquisitor is a strong kit in its own right and I think it's pretty useful in BG:EE. Sure, it's not crazy helpful every other battle like in BGII, but we all were expecting that.
  • kingthrallkingthrall Member Posts: 76
    this is the kind of thing I expected fixed with BG EE, the kits are imbalanced. Take the Druid v Cavalier. The druid only gets a few extra spells and has to wait much longer for their perks. Plus the shape-shifting abilities are terrible and worthwhile staying in human form.
  • karnor00karnor00 Member Posts: 680
    Mages in BG1 are missing most of their really good defensive spells. Few have stoneskin (and even fewer bother to use it). None have protection from magical weapons or globes of invulnerability. And no pesky liches with their natural immunity to non-magical weapons and below 6th level spells (and liches make up a lot of the casters you will meet in BG2).

    So in BG1 all they have is mirror image, and with their terrible AC they are easily brought down by melee and ranged weapons. They aren't even worth dispelling. So yes, I'd definitely agree that cavaliers are much more useful in BG1.

    However switch to BG2 and your cavalier won't have much joy against enemies effectively immune to melee damage. The inquisitor on the other hand will eat them for breakfast.
  • cyberarmycyberarmy Member Posts: 128
    Some of the kits classses are "worthless" in a BG1 point of view. Like Monk, Assassin or even Magi which shine in high levels of gameplay.
    I call this a challenge to be fair.
  • Aasimar069Aasimar069 Member Posts: 803
    karnor00 said:

    Mages in BG1 are missing most of their really good defensive spells. Few have stoneskin (and even fewer bother to use it). None have protection from magical weapons or globes of invulnerability. And no pesky liches with their natural immunity to non-magical weapons and below 6th level spells (and liches make up a lot of the casters you will meet in BG2).

    So in BG1 all they have is mirror image, and with their terrible AC they are easily brought down by melee and ranged weapons. They aren't even worth dispelling. So yes, I'd definitely agree that cavaliers are much more useful in BG1.

    However switch to BG2 and your cavalier won't have much joy against enemies effectively immune to melee damage. The inquisitor on the other hand will eat them for breakfast.


    That's why I said "in BG1".
    I have just finished the game last saturday, and mages didn't pose me a single problem.


  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192
    edited December 2012
    As I remember, Inquisitors are also immune to charm, but maybe it was just hold and the sort.

    In any case their Dispel seems to work just as well as it does in BG2, who aren't really limited to Mirror Image either: I've seen some Minor Globes, more than my share of Invisibility, and far too many Protections from Missiles, which do rather hurt my archer-centric party unless I'm willing to sacrifice a few magic arrows (and I never am). True Seeing is also actually even better because your other characters never get anything like it, with their level limits: it deals with Mirror Images and Invisibility and the sort just fine when you need to save those precious few Dispels.

    Besides, cavaliers never get to slay any dragons, and a grand total of one demon. Edit: Okay, make that two. Still not too many.
  • DragonspearDragonspear Member Posts: 1,838
    @Chow

    I think its 2 demons but your point stands anyway.

    (1 at the end of durlags, then aec back in Ulgoth's)
  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192
    Imagine if you're playing an Inquisitor, and right at the end of that quest, he laughs almost maniacally as he sees the demon. When he finally gets to do in one of those creatures he's been really taught to fight.

    Like a pyromaniacal wizard seeing a whole bunch of wood-monsters inside a dry rotting building.
  • Aasimar069Aasimar069 Member Posts: 803
    edited December 2012
    No, Cavaliers are not immune to Hold, but to Charms and Dire Charms. (not confusion nor Chaos).
    Chow said:

    Imagine if you're playing an Inquisitor, and right at the end of that quest, he laughs almost maniacally as he sees the demon. When he finally gets to do in one of those creatures he's been really taught to fight.

    Like a pyromaniacal wizard seeing a whole bunch of wood-monsters inside a dry rotting building.


    Cavaliers are taught to fight Demons. Your Inquisitor is taught to kill the magician cult leader that my Cavalier has just chewed up 1 seconds after the beginning of the fight, despite her protections.

    Cavalier have a bonus to hit and damage vs demons.


    @Chow : Oh my god ! Protection vs normal missiles...
    That's good I have magical ones. 5 hit and the mage is down.
  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192
    I did mention the magical arrows, if you noticed. I also mentioned that some of us are too miserly to use them.

    I'd spare my arrows to real powerful foes instead of wasting them to little weaklings such as mages, if I could - and Inquisitor makes it possible.
  • tobajastobajas Member Posts: 77
    Well as the thread is about BG 1 and not BG 2 I agree cavaliars are better then inquisitors. I am pretty sure though that the dispel effect from inquisitors also interupts spells when it triggers same effect as casting dispel magic has. Not 100% sure on this but im pretty sure it works.

    Also how can you cast remove fear on your party members? Are you carrying stacks of remove fear scrolls on you?

    But all in all in BG 1 i'd choose cavalier over any paladin kit any day.
  • Aasimar069Aasimar069 Member Posts: 803
    tobajas said:

    Well as the thread is about BG 1 and not BG 2 I agree cavaliars are better then inquisitors. I am pretty sure though that the dispel effect from inquisitors also interupts spells when it triggers same effect as casting dispel magic has. Not 100% sure on this but im pretty sure it works.

    Also how can you cast remove fear on your party members? Are you carrying stacks of remove fear scrolls on you?

    But all in all in BG 1 i'd choose cavalier over any paladin kit any day.


    The Cavalier has a special hability "remove fear" that boosts morale back, that can be used many times per day. It's an instant cast, so you can cast it just after the mage fear (If you have not killed him before ;-) ).

  • HowieHowie Member Posts: 136
    Kits are over the top for BG 1, but if you want them to translate to BG 2, they are essential.
  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192
    Howie said:

    Kits are over the top for BG 1, but if you want them to translate to BG 2, they are essential.

    Not really. It was perfectly possible to import your old BG1 character to BG2, even back before EE or TuTu or whatnot: you were given an option of picking up a kit upon importing process.
  • reedmilfamreedmilfam Member Posts: 2,808
    Seems like a Cavalier with Carsomyr would do just about as well as the Inquisitor, but I'm not an expert on such things.
  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192
    Technically, a Cavalier could do more with Carsomyr than Inquisitor, because he doesn't have its dispel effect available already.
  • MornmagorMornmagor Member Posts: 1,160
    edited December 2012
    Inquisitor doesn't dispel on hit. Carsomyr does.

    Really Inquisitor is not the super antimage everyone makes him to be, he's just that guy that dispells the illusions of the mages instantly, so you can then breach their protections in higher levels(with your mage, the inquisitor can't dispel that), allowing you then to hack them.

    He's really handy, but hardly something essential, you don't desperately need him to beat mages or liches in higher levels.

    And, obviously, he's a one-trick-pony, focusing on dispelling buffs or illusions, and he can't even do that properly without a mage to cast breach.

    No turn, no LoH, no spells, basically he can't even death ward himself for the incoming wail of the banshee, relying on the cleric to cast it on him.

    He gives you speed at dispelling, but you don't really need him.

    And yeah, obviously, in BG1 he doesn't really shine at all.
  • RhymeRhyme Member Posts: 190
    Silly thread is silly.

    You might as well say, "$1,000 is more than $20, so $20 is WORTHLESS!!!"

    Just because a Cavalier is a great kit in BG1 doesn't mean that an Inquisitor isn't also good. Some advantages that instantly spring to mind:

    - They can still equip ranged weapons (I consider cavaliers use of throwing axes to be an exploit that goes against the kit description)
    - Immune to two of the three most irritating statuses in the game (Hold and Charm).
    - They have an automatic/repeating invisibility remover, available at level 1
    - Most powerful dispel magic in the game, available at level 1

    And then you get to BG2, where I remember people complaining about how useless and underpowered the Cavalier kit was compared to the Inquisitor and the Undead Hunter. Because in BG2, fear and poison don't show up nearly as often, and aren't nearly as big a deal. You sort of level out of the Cavalier kits best perks, whereas the Inquisitor will always be useful.
  • QuineloeQuineloe Member Posts: 55
    Rhyme said:


    You might as well say, "$1,000 is more than $20, so $20 is WORTHLESS!!!"

    A silly comparison.

    It would actually be "you can choose between $20 and $1000".
  • DJKajuruDJKajuru Member Posts: 3,300
    Inquisitor in BG2 is a tremendously ooverpowered kit - double level dispel magic and true sight ? Gimme a break!
  • In BG1, with Mage defenses being weaker, an Inquisitor doesn't shine as much as in BG2. On the other hand, there is still plenty of opportunity to use Dispel Magic defensively. With the generally low saves a starting party has in BG1, you're going to be subject to Fear, Confusion, Hold, and Charm quite a bit. The Inquisitor has the capability of counteracting most of these effects, saving your spellcasters' 3rd level slots for more potent spells.
  • CheesebellyCheesebelly Member Posts: 1,727

    Oh my god ! Protection vs normal missiles...
    That's good I have magical ones. 5 hit and the mage is down.

    Cavaliers can't use missile weapons...
  • Aasimar069Aasimar069 Member Posts: 803
    edited December 2012

    Oh my god ! Protection vs normal missiles...
    That's good I have magical ones. 5 hit and the mage is down.

    Cavaliers can't use missile weapons...
    Coran can, and he's deadly :-)
    (He shot Davaerorn alone)

    And there are plenty of magical arrows in this game :-)

  • ChowChow Member Posts: 1,192

    Coran can, and he's deadly :-)
    (He shot Davaerorn alone)

    And there are plenty of magical arrows in this game :-)

    Well, then.

    If we have a mage with a Protection from Normal Missiles, and possibly a bunch of other low-level defense spells, the Cavalier will require Coran's help in dealing with him. Inquisitor can do it alone.

    Evidence is clear. Inquisitor is superior.
  • CheesebellyCheesebelly Member Posts: 1,727

    Oh my god ! Protection vs normal missiles...
    That's good I have magical ones. 5 hit and the mage is down.

    Cavaliers can't use missile weapons...
    Coran can, and he's deadly :-)
    (He shot Davaerorn alone)

    And there are plenty of magical arrows in this game :-)

    True, but we were comparing the paladins here, not their respective party members :p

    Truth is - both have their uses. Cavalier can be quite a formidable fearless leader, which is great in BG1, Inquisitor can be quite a witch hunter - which is great if you want to solo Sirines on level 1 - and an inquisitor can do that :P

  • Aasimar069Aasimar069 Member Posts: 803
    edited December 2012
    Chow said:


    Well, then.

    If we have a mage with a Protection from Normal Missiles, and possibly a bunch of other low-level defense spells, the Cavalier will require Coran's help in dealing with him. Inquisitor can do it alone.

    Evidence is clear. Inquisitor is superior.


    In this fight yes, in the others, no ;-)

    Still, I would not take an Inquisitor only for Davaeorn's fight ^_^
  • Aasimar069Aasimar069 Member Posts: 803

    Oh my god ! Protection vs normal missiles...
    That's good I have magical ones. 5 hit and the mage is down.

    Cavaliers can't use missile weapons...
    Coran can, and he's deadly :-)
    (He shot Davaerorn alone)

    And there are plenty of magical arrows in this game :-)

    True, but we were comparing the paladins here, not their respective party members :p

    Truth is - both have their uses. Cavalier can be quite a formidable fearless leader, which is great in BG1, Inquisitor can be quite a witch hunter - which is great if you want to solo Sirines on level 1 - and an inquisitor can do that :P


    Cavalier will do it too, since he's immune to dire charm ;-)
Sign In or Register to comment.