Who would win - Inquisitor or Fighter/Mage
Dreadnaught
Member Posts: 92
Since the fighter mage is winning the fight in my other discussion I think we should carry it over to a different duel.
Fighter13/mage 20 vs Inquisitor 23
You guys let me know if the experience level is close enough to be a fair fight.
Fighter 13/20 mage (two weapon fighting-equilizer, daystar) Spell buffed
Inquisitor 22 (Two-handed Corsymer +6) Special ability Summon Deva
Fighter13/mage 20 vs Inquisitor 23
You guys let me know if the experience level is close enough to be a fair fight.
Fighter 13/20 mage (two weapon fighting-equilizer, daystar) Spell buffed
Inquisitor 22 (Two-handed Corsymer +6) Special ability Summon Deva
0
Comments
In short sequencers/contingencies = likely mage win
No sequencers/contingencies = likely inquisitor win
If the F/M had some contingencies and/or time to cast a spell or two then he should win pretty comfortably. Then again, if the Inquisitor had enough invis potions he could probably win instead.
Of course a sensible Inquisitor would just run away until the F/M's protections wore off (and then run away again if he tried to recast them or a contingency went off). Would be a pretty dull fight, but with enough running room the Inquisitor should win every time. Cloak of Mirroring and/or luck with magic resistance would prevent the F/M doing fatal damage during a Time Stop.
1.) Spell Immunity - Abjuration
2.) Stoneskin
3.) PFMW
One cast of timestop and he'll butcher the Inquisitor.
The Inquisitor is incredible strong against the spellcasters in the game, but with the right combination the mage will shut him down.
The question is: Can the inquisitor stop the time stop casting? if he can maybe he has a chance (based on the pre-made chain contingency) if he can't stop the time stop he's dead.
With the right protection spells (Elemental against FoA) there is no way the Inquisitor could stop him unless he lands an instant kill with the Ravager.
Time Stop really is the dealbreaker in these discussions. There is nothing a player character can do against it legitimately, except with extensive pre-buffs and/or contingencies or Time Stops of their own. I doubt that any PC can survive a TS from a F/M or F->M in any scenario.
[SPOILER]After all the pictures in the Adventurer's Mart in BG2 establish that the kids were in the world of Baldur's Gate![/SPOILER]
From spell progression chart I'm looking at, a mage only gets 2 level 9 spells at level 20. A dual class mage can't be a specialist or sorceror. Now granted if they could chain both time stops together there's not much the Inquisitor could do, but without both timestops the F/M is toast.
The least thing the Inquisitor want to do is to give the mage even MORE time, you'll want to attack as soon as possible and try to find an opening to break down his defense before timestop.
Not to mention you can.
Timestop
True Sight
Timestop
Beat the Inquisitor to a pulp.
[Edited] :
Even without timestop the F/M would still win because of Spell Immunity - Abjuration, Stoneskin and PFMW. Not to mention Improved Haste.
You guys seem to forget that a 13 Fighter with improved haste is better in close combat than a 20 something Inquisitor.
Oh, and your planetar spell has incidentally reduced you to just the one time stop.
But I would agree that Timestop > Truesight > Timestop should be unstoppable. I can't see anything else working however.
The F/M will win 9/10 because of arcane spells being too powerful in this game to the point of breaking it. The Inquisitor is a very powerful character, but nothing wins against an arcane caster.
Most of the F/M spells will be too slow to cast while the Inquisitor is hitting him. Neither of them will have enough AC to avoid every attack being a hit (short of a critical miss). The F/M could maybe get off stoneskin or invis, but Inquisitor dispel/true sight can immediately take care of those. All of the F/M high level spells (such as timestop) would probably take much too long to cast.
Lower level F/M spells may get cast before interruption, but I doubt they would do enough damage to keep up with the Inquisitor bare hand attacks, but this would depend largely on how strong the Inquisitor is.
The Inquisitor can't really risk using GWW because he needs to keep his action for the round available to remove F/M buffs.
The easier way to bypass timestop is by identifying it's cast based on the ligths in the F/M hand and drinking a invisible potion while wearing cloak of non detection, that would make the time stop be wasted. However weapon imunnities spells can't be dispelled with dispel magic, if the F/M has a proper chain contingency set (protection from magical weapons, spell immunity necromancy, improved haste), taking in fact ToB characters normally are immune to +1 or less weapons (even as evil i normally go for this choice) i doubt the inquisitor to be able to kill the F/M.
Either way, he would need to choose between ravager for instant kill stoppable with spell immunity necromancy as far as i know or Holy Avenger to dispel on hit.
If the inquisitor can somehow cast a ruby ray of reversal at the f/m, he can break his spell immunity, and then dispel him easily.
If both starts from zero, with no buffs, no contingency/sequencer allowed for the f/m. In this situation, Inquisitor will kill the f/m. F/m first will cast a spell to protect himself, be it stoneskin, protection from magic weapons, invisibility, mirror image, mislead, etc. and the Inquisitor will just dispel him. Then the next round a greater whirlwind attack will disrupt and slay the f/m.
Let's imagine that the f/m has no spell immunity:abjuration. Who's gonna be alive in the end?
This also ties into what has been discussed in other difficulty-disccusion threads, that the vanilla AI is terrible at playing arcane casters efficiently, which is also likely why a lot of newer players underestimate them.
F/M is a class combination with high amounts of synergy and very few exploitable weaknesses, and often it's not until you experience one played intelligently against you that you realize just how difficult they can be to deal with.