Inquisitor vs. Wizard Slayer

BelgarathMTH

Hi, I was just thinking, isn't an inquisitor actually a better wizard slayer than a "wizard slayer"?

True Sight, Dispel Magic at twice your level, immune to Charm and Hold, plus no unusual magic item restrictions? Seems like a perfect "wizard slayer" to me. If I were an evil mage, I think I'd fear an inquisitor before anything else.

I was just fantasizing about playing a character who hates and wishes to destroy those who would abuse magic to dominate others, plus to undo evil spells and curses perpetrated against the innocent. (Flesh to Stone, Polymorph Other, and the like). And who also had the powers of super strength and super speed - kind of like Superman vs. Mxyzptlk or something like that.

Is there any reason why the "wizard slayer" class could do this fantasy better than the inquisitor? Or, can you think of another class or multi-class that would do it better than either? Like maybe a fighter-mage? Thoughts, please?

Kamigoroshi

You know, the name of "Wizard Slayer" is a typo, rooted from a common misconception of this kit. It's correct kit name is actually "Slayed-by-Wizards".

BelgarathMTH

@Kamigoroshi, LOL. But, serious answers, anyone?

Tresset

My BG2 Monk is, well, hes actually an everything killer but he is immune to magic and his quiver palm can kill wizards through all their stone skins and mirror images. Monks get pretty darn awesome in BG2. And I personally prefer inquisitor of the choices you listed, only they get a certain something in BG2 that gives them a 50% resistance to magic.

BelgarathMTH

@Tresset, but, how did your monk ever get there in the first place? I can see the "Superman" connection, but it would only work in BG if monks had a good, linear character class progression. As it stands, a monk would never survive in BG1 to ever make 9th level, unless he were carried as total dead weight through the whole game, in exchange for a hoped-for level of "Superman" power in BG2.

I'd rather have a character class that is a good anti-evil-mage from levels one to forty. My vote is still with the inquisitor as the ultimate evil-mage-destroyer, for the whole trilogy.

Tresset

No one, aside from the Wslayer, is going to be especially good at beating up mages in BG1 If this is for role playing purposes the only benefit that the paladin has is that massive dispel. Otherwise, from a role playing stand point, I'd pick Wslayer.
Edit: Actually, the way you describe your fantasy in the first post... Sounds like you should consider a pure Druid. They hate the unnatural curses and magics and stuff plus they get the best caster counter in the game.

BelgarathMTH

@Tresset, as an inquisitor, I am immune to at least half of the worst that my hated evil mages can do to me. (They can neither Charm nor Hold me.) That is a huge increase in my power to fight them, of itself.

Also with me as an inquisitor, they will never be able to escape my wrath through Mirror Image, Blur, Invisibility, Improved Invisibility, Dimension Door, Mislead, or any other of their usual nefarious "ha, ha, you'll never get me" illusionary, dishonorable, lying tactics.

As long as I stand, they will never disable any of my allies through their evil, filthy magics, because I will reverse their cursed spells as soon as they cast them, and I will always do it at near twice their level.

Sorry, but I still don't see a better evil mage fighter than the inquisitor.

moopy

inquisitor > wizard slayer

Pantalion

Yes, Inquisitor is better than the Wizard Slayer.
Yes the Druid is better than the Inquisitor, because enemy mages are covered in beeeees.

ajwz

The problem is Wizards > Wizard slayer

BelgarathMTH

@Pantalion, not in BG1, they're not. You would need at least 3rd level spells to do it at one-half effectiveness. You would need a whopping FIVE spell levels to cast the full-strength Insect Plague. And, that diamond of a spell competes with Iron Skins, and Wondrous Recall.

I want a character that's powerful against evil mages from levels one to forty, not a character that is as helpless as a baby against mages until he/she has access to high level magic of his/her own!

Best to leave my good friends, the druids and good mages, to help me all along the way, not to try to be one myself, and likely die against Tarnesh before I ever even reach character level two!

EDIT: Sorry, Tarnesh, not Tranzig.

BelgarathMTH

@ajwz, but, what I'm suggesting is, inquisitors>mages>wizard slayers. As in, why even bother to have a class that is totally invalidated by another class that does its job much better, and also does pretty damn well in a bunch of other situations besides mage battles?

I don't mean to start a debate, but rather than to ask, is there a better mage fighter from Candlekeep to Melissan, than the inquisitor class? Not, a better mage fighter from Irenicus' Dungeon to Melissan, but, specifically, from Candlekeep to Melissan.

Tresset

I refuse to wear magic items cuz....uhhhhhh....duhhh....magic b bad....yeah. What dis? Holy ring of anti-magic made by da gods? Me no use dat. It remind of mage man. What b dat? OOOHHH! Magic sword made by wizards! Me has no problem using dat!

Truly this is one of the worst (and dumbest) kit disadvantages of all.

BelgarathMTH

@Tresset, ROFLMAO! You da man!

Tresset

Really? You liked that? Everyone (by everyone I mean my brother) tells me I'm terrible at making jokes...

BelgarathMTH

@Tresset, your brother must not be a card-carrying nerd-club member!

(singing, in three-part harmony:)

"Our whole universe was in a hot, dense state." (Backup singers: oooooooo)
"But nearly 14 billion years ago expansion started..." (Backup singers: HOT, HOT, HOT, HOT!)
"WAIT"
(music becomes manic)
"The universe began to cool the autotropes began to drool neanderthals invented tools we built a wall! we built the pyramids! and math science history unravel the mystery it all started with
"A big bang" (Backup singers: BANG!)

LOL

Raistlin82

Kensai > Wizard slayer
Berserker > Wizard slayer
Inquisitor > Wizard slayer
Wizard > Wizard slayer

Oh, for the...

ANYTHING > Wizard slayer

Tresset

belgarathmth said:

@Tresset, your brother must not be card-carrying nerd-club member!

True enough. But I will admit that he could be a professional comedian if he wanted to...
Anyway I have a pretty odd sense of humor. I don't think most people get a lot of my jokes.

BelgarathMTH

@Tresset, you're Home, my brother. I betcha everybody here in this forum will get all your jokes! In real life, nobody gets my jokes, either. I'm considered a real dud and a party pooper, or else batsh*t crazy. Here, we nerds can laugh together!

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Tresset

@Shandyr Show off...
Edit: So you agree? I was actually referring to you with your fancy pants posting know how. I'm a forum noob. I use my WORDS to make people laugh. So there...

BelgarathMTH

@Shandyr, so, your point is? A first level wizard slayer can beat Firebead Elvenhair?

I've got some counterpoints: First, I don't have an interest in attacking good wizards. I'd be a lot more impressed if I saw WizardsPuppy defeating evil mages out in the game.

Second, I wonder what WizardsPuppy will do when faced with a Charm or Hold spell, or when one of his party members falls to such a spell?

Third, I think that attacking Firebead Elvenhair is actually a game exploit, and was not intended to be done by a first level character. Of course, one could argue that all BG2 kits are not intended to be in BG1.

So, am I supposed to want to play a wizard slayer instead of an inquisitor after watching that? I need more convincing, especially through videos of fights against enemies that you're actually supposed to fight.

I could still conceivably be convinced that a wizard slayer is the way to go, but, I don't know, giving up magic items and Dispel, and Charm and Hold immunity, and True Sight, all in the hope that you can engage and disrupt an enemy mage before he/she screws you?

I know that it's totally doable. I guess what I'm asking is, is it easier or preferable to doing it through an inquisitor or a fighter-mage?

Also, I still haven't heard anyone weigh in on whether an inquisitor or a fighter-mage is better?

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Raistlin82

It's not really "good" mages or "evil" mages.
It's more "pacific mages who let you come up close and personal without attacking" and "hostile mages who will shoot you down / charm / confuse / otherwise incapacitate you from far away, before you can even take a step towards them."

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Madhax

While I'm on board with most people's opinion that Inquisitor > Wizard Slayer, keep in mind that a Wizard Slayer can dual-class. I've heard that, if you're willing to put up with playing a single-class wizard slayer for several levels, a wslayer->thief or wslayer->mage is pretty potent. An Inquisitor is always an Inquisitor.

Dragonspear

@Shandyr

I think I might join you as well.

Dwarven Wizard Slayer and bring Ajantis/Keldorn along for the ride.

badbromance

Madhax said:

While I'm on board with most people's opinion that Inquisitor > Wizard Slayer, keep in mind that a Wizard Slayer can dual-class. I've heard that, if you're willing to put up with playing a single-class wizard slayer for several levels, a wslayer->thief or wslayer->mage is pretty potent. An Inquisitor is always an Inquisitor.

I think the problem is that a kensai-thief(or mage) and a beserker-thief(or mage) will be much more potent. I'm not a Wizard Slayer hater, I actually like the concept but not what is available from the kit.

Deucetipher

Berserker gets temporary immunity to all the nasty wizard abilities (except petrification/polymorph), so it might be worth a look. Will be a major advantage compared to inquisitor later in the saga to be proof against maze and imprisonment. Additionally gets GM. You lack the offensive antimagic capabilities, but it's well-worth considering. Also keep an eye out for Albruin+1 (Invisibility Purge 1/day), and utilize arrows of dispelling and biting (for either class).

On that note, an Archer or fighter with GM in bows might be worth considering. The specialized ammo can be used to neutralize mages pretty easily. However, the specialized ammo might not be available in BG2EE.

The last option would be backstabby classes, like Stalker or thief kits. A backstab usually OHKOs most mages (throw on Dagger of Venom for more laughs), and the stalker additionally gets minor spell deflection, which is pretty cool. This is my typical anti-mage tactic in BG1.

In many ways, the best antiwizard is another wizard. Memorize a bunch of anti-protection spells. A f/m would get most of the same benefits while keeping a warrior-type character. F/M/T would additionally gain backstab capability. Clerics deserve a mention, particularly Clerics of Helm, but doesn't seem what you're looking for. I'd probably go Berserker, Inquisitor, F/M/T, F/T, or F/M. Backstab alone will get you pretty solidly through BG1 in terms of anti-mage.

Dragonspear

I'd rate Blade above FMT or FM and inquisitor over berserker purely due to carsomyr =/

Nitram_Vi_Hermannia

So i've decided to play with wizard slayer. And it has some advantage. If you encounter mage that is alone, you will just kill it without him using any spells. Problem is, when mage is already buffed or in teamfight, but even than it's still easy to kill mage. + wizard slayer can be used vs all caster classes.

But wizard slayer is good only at the beginning. Don't think that you can play for wizard slayer in BG2 and be of any use. So thats why i think that answer at your question is : Inquisitor.